IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a judicious exercise of discretion in granting bail, considering the seriousness of the offence, the nature of the evidence, and the principles highlighted in various Supreme Court decisions.

JUDGMENT :

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. 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.I-11210012231364 of 2023 registered with the Chawk Bazar Police Station, Surat of the offence punishable under Sections 302, 324, 323, 504, 114 of IPC and Section 135 of the G.P. Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the present complaint has been filed by the brother of the deceased stating that on 22.10.2023, the brother of the complainant, i.e, the deceased, namely, Jaydev left the house at around 9:00 p.m. and went to Vishramnagar for playing Garba.

3.1 Thereafter, on 23.10.2023, when the complainant and the other family members were sleeping, at that time, at around 1:30 a.m., the friends of Jaydev, namely, Sanjay Mohanbhai Baraiya and Yuvraj Bhoyee came to the house of the complainant and woken them up and told them that in the yesterday afternoon, as some unknown person clicked the photo of one Shitalben in the Vishramnagar area, the brother of the complainant Jaydev, Pawan and Haresh started beating that person, and as one Pappu Rohit Pradhan who was present over there, came in the rescue of that unknown person, Shitalben, Pawan and Haresh got enraged and started beating Pappu Pradhan by giving kicks and fist blows. They further informed the complainant that today, i.e., on 23.10.2023, when both of them along with Jaydev, Haresh and Pawan were present in the Vishramnagar Society at around 1:00 a.m., at that time, Dipak Pradhan and his brother Pappu Pradhan along with two other persons came to them with a knife in their hands, and keeping a grudge of the yesterday’s quarrel, hurled abuses to Jaydev and Dipak Pradhan and Pappu Pradhan inflicted knife blows indiscriminately to the Jaydev whereas the other two persons also gave kicks and fist blows to Jaydev. Thereafter, as Dipak Pradhan also got injured in the said quarrel, fled from the spot. They also told the complainant that , thereafter, they called the 108 ambulance and the deceased was taken to the Smimer Hospital for treatment.

3.2 Thereafter, the complainant along with his mother Suvarnaben went to the Smimer Hospital in a rented rickshaw who after reaching the hospital, found that his brother Jaydev was undergoing treatment in the emergency ward in an unconscious condition. Multiple injuries were found to be there on the different parts of the body of the Jaydev. Thereafter, at around 3:00 a.m.. the doctors declared his as dead. Hence, the present FIR.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Maulik Nanavati assisted by learned advocate Mr. Tolia appearing for the applicant has submitted that the incident in question took place on 23.10.2023 for which the FIR came to be lodged on the very same day and the applicant-accused also got arrested on the even date. Learned advocate for the applicant has also submitted that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has also been filed. It is moreso submitted that the allegations levelled in the FIR are to the effect that on the date of the incident, the applicant-accused accompanied by other co-accused persons had gone to the place where the deceased was sitting carrying a deadly weapons and slain the deceased by inflicting knife blows indiscriminately to him. Learned advocate Mr. Nanavati would further submit that the Muddamal knife used in the commission of the offence has not been recovered at the instance of the applicant-accused but it has been recovered from the other co-accused. In fact, the applicant-accused also received injuries in the said scuffle and, therefore, there were cross-complaints filed by the rival sides. Learned advocate Mr. Nanavati further submits that as per the postmortem report, the deceased died due to the knife injuries, however, there is no recovery of any knife at the instance of the applicant-accu