Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 706 (GUJ)

Baljeetsingh Satnamsingh Jaat v. State of Gujarat

2019-07-05

VIPUL M.PANCHOLI

body2019
ORDER : 1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.No.I-104 of 2018 registered with Bhachau Police Station, East Kutch Gandhidham for offence under Sections 302, 394, 120B, 411, 413, 201 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. 3. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. 4. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order. 5. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. This Court has also considered the aspects that; (i) the applicant is in jail since 15.9.2018; (ii) the investigation is concluded and charge-sheet is filed; (iii) it is contended by learned advocate for the applicant that initially FIR in question was filed for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 279, 304A, 201 of Indian Penal Code read with Sections 177, 184 and 134 of the Motor Vehicles Act; (iv) it is further submitted that during the course of investigation, the report was submitted by the investigating officer to add Section 302, 394, 411 and 120B of Indian Penal Code and delete Sections 304A and 279 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 177, 184 and 134 of Motor Vehicles Act; (v) it is further submitted that in the investigating papers, there is no material collected by the agency connecting the present applicant with the incident in question except the confessional statement of the applicant-accused; (vi) however, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that CDRs of mobile phone of deceased and the applicant are recovered from which it can be said that the applicant is rightly implicated in the incident in question; (vii) I have considered the material produced on record and the investigating papers placed before me during the course of hearing of this application; (viii) there is no material in the investigating papers connecting the present applicant with the incident in question; (ix) it is a case of circumstantial evidence and the prosecution has prima facie failed to point out any material against the applicant connecting him with the incident in question; in view of the aforesaid, I am inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant. 6. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40. 7. Hence, the present application is allowed. 6. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40. 7. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.No.I-104 of 2018 registered with Bhachau Police Station, Kutch East Gandhidham on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall; [a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; [b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution; [c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week; [d] not leave India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; [e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station between 1st to 10th day of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.; [f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court; 8. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. 9. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order. 10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.