IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Gita Gopi, J.
Kevin Hasmukhbhai Patel – Applicant
Versus
Parth Kamal Kothari & Anr. – Respondents
R/Criminal Misc. Application (For Cancellation Of Bail) No.13008 of 2023
Decided On : 08-08-2024
Bail - Quashing of Bail Order - IPC Section 302, Gujarat Police Act Section 135 - The court emphasized the importance of considering all evidence, including circumstantial evidence, and the gravity of the offense in bail decisions, leading to the cancellation of the bail granted by the Sessions Judge.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought to quash the bail granted to the accused in a murder case, arguing that critical evidence was ignored by the Sessions Judge, including CCTV footage and witness statements linking the accused to the crime.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Sessions Judge had failed to consider substantial evidence, including the brutality of the murder and the circumstantial evidence indicating the accused's involvement, leading to the conclusion that the bail order was unjustified.
Issues: Whether the bail granted to the accused should be quashed based on the evidence presented and the nature of the crime.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a bail order can be quashed if it is found to be based on irrelevant materials or if relevant evidence has been ignored, particularly in serious offenses like murder.
Result: The bail granted to the accused is quashed and set aside.
ORDER :
Gita Gopi, J.
1. Heard Mr. Bhunesh Rupera, learned advocate for the applicant, Mr. Darshan Varandani, learned advocate for respondent no.1 and Mr. Hardik Mehta, learned APP for the respondent–State.
2. RULE. Learned advocates waives service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.
3. The applicant is the original complainant. The brother of the deceased has made a prayer for quashing and setting aside the bail granted to respondent no.1-accused on 1.7.2023 vide order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Criminal Misc. Application no.1500 of 2023 in connection with FIR no.11196030220696/2022 registered with Sayajiganj Police Station, Vadodara City under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Bhunesh Rupera for the applicant submitted that younger brother of the complainant Daksh was killed on 3.10.2022. The police had recovered knife, knife cover and mobile phone of the deceased from the place as pointed out by the accused. The CCTV footage captured shows that the accused and the deceased were last seen together. The CCTV footage of the places from where the accused had purchased the knife, water bottle, string, though available on record has not been considered by the learned Sessions Judge. The shopkeeper has supported the recovery of the mobile phone from the roof top of the shop and vital evidence in the form of CCTV footage has been totally ignored by the learned Sessions Judge. Advocate Mr. Rupera submitted that the statement of Darshan Devendra Bhatt, tutor of the deceased and the accused, whose tuition class was attended by both the deceased and the accused reflects the conversation which he had with the accused who was seeking advise from the tutor for self defence in case of commission of murder. Advocate Mr. Rupera submitted that as per the postmortem report, multiple stab wounds 21 in number have been noted apart from other incise wounds and even the major stab wound in the abdominal cavity. The brutal murder though gets reflected in the postmortem report, the learned Sessions Judge has totally ignored the prima facie evidence on record and without assigning any reasons has granted the bail. Advocate Mr. Rupera submitted that CCTV footage of the control room of the cross road shows that the deceased and the accused had gone together but while returning back, the accused was all alone. Advocate Mr. Rupera submitted that the learned Judge has mechanically passed the order of granting bail though it is a case of brutal murder.
5. Advocate Mr. Darshan Varandani for the respondent no.1 – accused submitted that the learned Judge has observed the arguments in the order and considering the age of the applicant as 19 and since he was pursuing his academics with M.S. University of Vadodara in 2nd year commerce and when the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed having not found any criminal antecedents and have observed his conduct during the temporary bail and considering the fact that there is no direct evidence to connect him with the crime and the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence, benefit of bail has been granted and thus, submitted that the order being reasoned order, bail should not be cancelled at the stage when the charge had already been framed.
6. Mr. Hardik Mehta, learned APP has produced a report of Police Inspector, Sayajiganj Police Station, Vadodara City, wherein it has been noted that initially the complaint was given against an unknown person and the cause of death was for the injuries on stomach and chest. The FSL and dog squad was called on the spot with the Government photographer. The deceased spectacles, chapals, blood samples were seized. The photographs of the place of the offence was recorded and CD was produced. The CCTV footage of the place of incident and the surrounding areas were checked and it was seen that the deceased was lastly seen with the accused and both had come at Alankar tower and the
The court established that bail in serious offenses must consider all relevant evidence, and failure to do so can lead to cancellation of the bail order.
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 p....
The court affirmed that in serious offenses, circumstantial evidence and severity of potential punishment must prevail in bail considerations, denying the petitioner's release amid serious accusation....
Bail should not be granted mechanically; serious allegations against the accused warrant careful judicial consideration, especially in heinous crimes.
The main legal point established is that the discretion to grant bail should be exercised judiciously, considering the seriousness of the offence and the need for proper reasoning in bail orders.
(1) Judicial discretion in granting or refusing bail, as in case of any other discretion which is vested in a court as a judicial institution, is not unstructured.(2) Parity while granting bail must ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a judicious exercise of discretion in granting bail, considering factors such as the nature of the offense, severity of punishment, an....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.