The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for proper exercise of discretion while granting bail, considering the gravity of the offence, the nature of evidence, and the severity of punishment in case of conviction.

1. Rule. Mr. Shah waive service of notice of rule for respondent no.2 while Ms. Jhaveri waives service of notice of rule for respondent no.1.

2. Petitioner being a complainant of Thara police station, Ist C.R. No.58 of 2013 has challenged the order dated 13.12.2013 granting bail to respondent nos.2 to 6 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Deesa, passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.1052 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 324 etc.

3. The petitioner has, on 7.6.2013 lodged the complaint before the police station disclosing that on 6.6.2013, two persons namely; Kanaksinh C. Vaghela and Jashubha C. Vaghela, probably respondent no.6 herein, had come to his parlor and sat outside his parlor. When complainant asked them about their sitting outside his parlor, it is the say of the complainant that both of them had become angry and stated that complainant is not knowing them. They have further stated that they are Darbars of Thara and when complainant has stated that he does not recognize or know them, though both of them had gone away from them, they have given a threat to the complainant. It is further stated that after half an hour, respondent nos.2 to 6 and Kanaksinh etc. had come at the place of incident with Cudgel, Hockey stick, Sword, Knife and other weapons and at that time when father of the petitioner namely; Ravaji Bhikhaji was coming to his parlor with brothers of the petitioner, Sangramji and Pintu, all these accused have rushed to them and amongst them Kanaksinh has hit blow of a sword on the head and legs of complainant's father. Whereas, Jashubha had given a blow by Hockey stick on hands of the complainant's father.

Thereby, complainant's father was fallen down and all of them had beaten him as well as Sangramji and when complainant's father Ravaji and his brother Sangramji Ravaji had fallen down, the accused has rushed towards the complainant and his another brother Pintu, but they both had run away from the place of incident towards toll tax. However, at that time, Kanaksinh has chased them and given a blow on head of the complainant by a sword. At the same time, other accused have beaten the brother of the complainant Pintu by Cudgel, Hockey stick and Knife and because of such incident, complainant and his brothers etc. shouted and cried, which resulted into gathering all other people, who have rescued them and managed to call ambulance by making a phone call on 108. It is further stated that father of the complainant was unconscious and they were transferred to Patan but during the treatment, father of the complainant was died because of the injuries sustained by him.

4. The above story makes it clear that if Kanaksinh C. Vaghela has given a fatal blow to the victim Ravjibhai as well as to the complainant, certainly he cannot be entitled to be released at least till investigation is over and chargesheet is filed considering the gravity of crime and direct involvement and direct specific evidence against him.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances emerging from the available record when it is crystal clear that respondent no.2 has given a fatal blow on the head of the victim by a sword and he had ran away from the place of incident. Second time, within half an hour came with a sword in his hands and with the support of other accused, he is the main conspirator and person responsible for the entire incident, wherein, one innocent person has been killed though his quarrel, if any, was with the complainant and not with his father. Therefore, discussion of available material in detail would result into prejudice the defence and though the same is avoided, it is clear and certain that considering the role of the respondent no.2 in the commission of offence and it results into a death of father of the complainant, it would not be appropriate for trial Court to exercise discretionary power to release such person on bail only because charge sheet is filed. Therefore, this application