Dilip Babulal Tapadia
Vs. State of Maharashtra  INSC 711 (9 April 2009)
JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 682 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.
5823/2008) Dalip Babulal Tapadia .. Appellant(s) Versus State of Maharashtra ..
Respondent(s) ORDER Leave granted.
This appeal is
directed against order dated 21st July, 2008 passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 874 of 2008. By the impugned order,
the High Court has declined to extend to the appellant the protection of
anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in
FIR No. 48 of 2008, filed in Deccan Police Station, Pune under Sections 420,
467, 468, 471 read with Sections 34 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code. By virtue
of the said order, the High Court had directed the appellant to surrender before
the Trial Court by 31st July, 2008.
When the matter came
up before the learned Chamber Judge on 6th August, 2008, application filed by
the appellant for exemption from surrendering was dismissed as not maintainable
as the appellant had only been denied the privilege of anticipatory bail.
No one appears on
behalf of the State. Accordingly, we have heard learned counsel for the
appellant and the de facto complainant.
It is submitted by
learned counsel for the appellant that as per his instructions investigation in
the complaint are complete and shortly the prosecution is likely to take
further steps in the matter.
Having regard to the
facts and circumstances of the case and bearing in mind the fact that F.I.R.
was lodged as far back as in January 2008 and so far no action has been taken
against the appellant despite rejection of his prayer for anticipatory bail in
July 2008, and further there is no allegation against him regarding
non-cooperation in the investigation, we dispose of the appeal with the
direction that in the event of filing of charge sheet against the appellant and
on being informed by the Public Prosecutor about the filing of charge sheet, he
shall surrender before the trial Court and apply for regular bail. It goes
without saying that the application of the appellant for grant of regular bail
shall be considered in its correct perspective in accordance with law. However,
if the investigations are still incomplete, in the event of his arrest he shall
be .. CA 630/2009...contd..
admitted to bail on
his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, which will
continue to be in force till appropriate orders are passed on appellant's
application for regular bail.
Before closing, we
may note that it has been brought to our notice that yet another FIR being No.
207 of 2008 has been filed against the appellant on 25th June, 2008 in the same
Police Station. We clarify that this order will have no bearing whatsoever,
insofar as the said FIR is concerned.
[ D.K. JAIN ]
[ R.M. LODHA ]