The decision emphasized the importance of considering the nature of the offence, severity of the punishment, and the likelihood of the accused interfering with the process of justice when deciding on a bail application.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11824001211106 of 2021 registered with the Vyara Police Station, Tapi of the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 324, 120(B), 201, 225, 212 and 114 of the IPC and Section 135 of the G.P. Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is as under; 2.1 On 14.05.2021, the complainant received a message that when his cousin brother, namely, Nishishbhai Manubhai, i.e, the deceased was standing near one fruit shop at the side of the highway road near the temple of Vrudavadi Hanumanji, at that time, four unknown persons, as a part of pre-planned criminal conspiracy, came in one silver colour KUV four-wheel of Mahindra company bearing registration No.GJ-05-JP-2445 and dashed the same with the Moped bike of the deceased, due to which, the deceased fell down. Thereafter, all those unknown persons got down from the said four-wheel with the sword and knife on their hands and made an assault on the deceased. As the shopkeeper Ganeshbhai and his persons tried to intervene, the accused persons started giving deadly blows to them due to which they also received serious injuries. Thereafter, all the accused persons ran after the deceased and pushed him down on the road near Shanidev Temple and rained deadly blows with the sword and knife on the head, nose, chest and different parts of the body of the deceased and thereby committed a serious offence of murder for the reasons best known to them. Hence, the impugned FIR.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Zubin Bharda assisted by learned advocate Mr. Kishan Daiya appearing for the applicant has submitted that so called incident took place on 14.05.2021 and on the very same day, the FIR came to be lodged. The applicant-accused was arrested on 31.05.2021 and since then he is in jail. It is further submitted that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has also been filed. Learned advocate Mr. Bharda has submitted that the complaint does not name any person and the same came to be lodged against some unknown persons with the allegations that some persons made an assault on the deceased while he was on his way heading towards his house. Learned advocate Mr. Bharda has further submitted that during the course of investigation, it is revealed that the deceased got married with the sister of the co-accused Vijay Mansukhbhai Patel which he did not like and keeping grudge of the same, the said Vijaybhai Patel gave a contract to the applicant-accused to kill the deceased and the applicant-accused in turn gave the said contract to the other co-accused persons. It is also submitted that the only allegation levelled against the applicant-accused is that he was given a contract to kill the deceased for which he was paid Rs.50,000/-. The said allegation was made only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused and as such there is no material or evidence to substantiate the said allegation. Learned advocate Mr. Bharda has submitted that the co-accused Vijay Mansukhbhai Patel, who alleged to have been given the contract to the applicant-accused has already been released on bail by the Hon’ble Apex Court. The entire case of the prosecution is based upon circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence against the applicant-accused. It is submitted that the applicant-accused has been arraigned as an accused on the basis of the statement made by the co-accused. The only role attributed to the applicant-accused is that he had facilitated the other co-accused to eliminate the deceased. It was a matter of love affair of the deceased and the sister of the main accused and the present applicant-accused has nothing to do with the same in any manner. He has been falsely implicated in the present offence. Learned advocate Mr. Bharda has further submitted that the co-accused who alleged to have been given the contract to the applicant-