R/CR.MA/5746/2013                                                  ORDER




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR MODIFICATION OF ORDERS) NO.
                                             5746 of 2013
                In SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1722 of 2012
         ==========================================================
                          ASHISH BAGRODIA....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus
                      STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         NANAVATI ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
         MR VAIBHAV A VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         MR LB DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================
          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
                                      Date : 27/03/2017
                                         ORAL ORDER

                      Heard           learned              advocate          for          Nanavati
         Associates        for        the    applicant,             learned           Additional

Public Prosecutor Mr.L.B. Dabhi for respondent No.1- State and learned advocate Mr.Vaibhav Vyas for respondent No.2.

2. What is prayed in this application is to clarify that order dated 07th August, 2012 passed by this Court not only stayed the non-bailable warrant issued pursuant to order dated 16th July, 2010 by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajpipla, but the personal appearance of the applicant is also dispensed with. Secondly, it is prayed to set aside order dated 22nd March, 2013 passed in Criminal Case No.144 of 1998 pending before the aforesaid Court. It is also prayed to grant exemption to the applicant from remaining present in the proceedings of the criminal case in Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 13 14:53:46 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/5746/2013 ORDER question.

3. It appears that the main Special Criminal Application No.1722 of 2012 is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash Criminal Case No.144 of 1998 pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajpipla, District Narmada, which is in respect of offence under Sections 24, 25, 43, 44 and 47 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. In the said proceedings learned Chief Judicial Magistrate issued order dated 16th July, 2010 for non- bailable warrant in the name of the petitioner. It appears that this Court by passing order dated 07th August, 2012 granted ad-interim relief stating as under.

"4. Ad-interim relief in terms of paragraph 23(D) qua the Petitioner till then on condition that by the next date, the affidavit of the Petitioner will be filed declaring that he will remain present through the Advocate on every date and shall not ask for any adjournment."

3.1 The grievance of the applicant-petitioner is that despite the aforesaid order, the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajpipla again directed to issue non-bailable warrant as per his order dated 22nd March, 2013. The said order is the cause of action which brought the applicant before this Court by means of present application.

4. Besides the case of the applicant that he is a physically challenged person constantly on wheelchair and suffers from 80% disability and that he cannot mobilise himself without a helper or nurse, learned advocate submitted that the order dated 07th Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 13 14:53:46 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/5746/2013 ORDER August, 2012 itself was clear and in wake of the said order, there was no question of issuing subsequent order of issuance of non-bailable warrant by the court concerned. He further submitted that the applicant has been abiding by the condition of stay.

5. There is substance in the submission and case of the applicant. The order dated 08th August, 2012 is amply clear wherein it is stated that the applicant shall file affidavit declaring that he will remain present through advocate on every date and shall not ask for adjournment. It is, therefore, apparently clear that the personal presence of the applicant during the proceedings is exempted and is permitted to remain present through advocate.

6. In the circumstances, this application deserves to be allowed and the same is allowed in terms of paragraph 8(A), 8(B) and 8(C) of the application on condition that the applicant shall continue to abide by the conditions stated in order dated 07th August, 2012.

6.1 Resultantly, order dated 22nd March, 2013 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajpipla in Criminal Case No.144 of 1998 issuing non-bailable warrant against the applicant is set aside and it is clarified that the order dated 07th August, 2012 shall govern in respect of the question of presence of the applicant.

7. Application stands disposed of accordingly.

                                                 Page 3 of 4

HC-NIC                                        Page 3 of 4       Created On Sun Aug 13 14:53:46 IST 2017
                 R/CR.MA/5746/2013                                           ORDER



                                                               (N.V.ANJARIA, J.)
         Anup




                                       Page 4 of 4

HC-NIC                              Page 4 of 4      Created On Sun Aug 13 14:53:46 IST 2017