SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Guj) 1346

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.
RAJUBHAI CHATURBHAI PARMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
Criminal Misc. Application (For Regular Bail - After Chargesheet) No. 12890 of 2023
Decided On : 18-12-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : N.P. ZAVERI
For the Respondent: MANAN MEHTA

Court emphasized that bail applications must be evaluated on the basis of the accused's specific role and the seriousness of the charges, not merely on parity with co-accused.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 307, 302, 323, 324, 504, 506(2), 114 - Bail application filed for regular bail in connection with FIR for multiple charges including attempt to murder - Allegations include serious bodily harm inflicted by multiple accused using various weapons resulting in death - Postmortem confirms multiple injuries. (Paras 1-8)

(B) Bail - Conditions and considerations - Court emphasizes that parity in bail decisions must focus on the role of the accused; mere similarity of situation among co-accused is insufficient to grant bail; suppression of material fact while seeking bail can lead to dismissal of application. (Paras 19)

Facts of the case:
The FIR was filed after an incident where the applicant and co-accused allegedly attacked complainant and relatives leading to multiple injuries and death of a cousin, with subsequent modification of charges to include murder after a victim's death. (Paras 2-4)

Findings of Court:
The court noted significant medical evidence corroborating prosecution's case and determined that the applicant-accused's role was serious, thus not justifying bail under Section 439. (Paras 10-14)

Issues: The primary issues included the sufficient grounds for bail in light of the serious charges and the applicant's role compared to that of co-accused. (Paras 5, 19)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence supports severe culpability, indicating a strong case against the applicant and underscored the importance of complete disclosure in bail applications to the court. (Paras 8, 19)

Result: Application for bail dismissed with costs. (Para 20)

Table of Content
1. factual background of the incident. (Para 1 , 2)
2. defense arguments regarding evidence. (Para 3 , 4)
3. prosecution's objections to bail. (Para 5)
4. court analysis of evidence and intentions. (Para 6 , 10 , 18)
5. legal definitions and implications. (Para 7 , 8 , 12 , 14)
6. court's assessment of evidence and legality of actions. (Para 9 , 11 , 13 , 16)
7. criteria for attempt to murder conviction. (Para 15 , 17)
8. parody of bail applications considered. (Para 19)
9. final ruling on bail application. (Para 20)

JUDGMENT :

DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.

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. I-11211015220028 of 2022 registered with the Dhragandhra City Police Station, Surenranagar of the offence punishable under Sections 307 , 323, 324, 504, 506(2) read with Section 114 of the IPC and Section 135 of the G.P. Act.

2. The facts in brief leading to the filing of the present application may be summarized as under:

    2.1 That the complainant lodged the impugned FIR on 23.01.2022 against total four persons wherein the present applicant-accused has been shown as an accused No. 3. It is alleged in the complaint that on 22.01.2022, at around 8:00 O’clock in the night hours, while the complainant along with his uncle were standing on the side of the road near his house, the accused Nos. 1 to 3, namely, Shankarbhai @ Salim Dudabhai Parmar, Vinodbhai Dudabhai Parmar and Rajubhai Chaturbhai Parmar, who were residing next to his house, had passed through the said road and at that time, as the said accused persons were staring them, the complainant also looked towards them, upon which, all the aforesaid persons got instigated and started abusing the complainant and his uncle. At that time, the accused No. 4, namely, Kishorbhai Chaturbhai Parmar also came there and he also started abusing them. Thereafter, all the accused persons threatened them to stay there, they will come back with the weapons. Therefore, upon hearing the shouting, the cousin of the complainant, namely, Krunalbhai Rameshbhai also reached there and, thereafter, all of them left the place. When they reached near the house of one Tapubhai Devjibhai Parmar at Ambedkarnagar, all the accused persons came from opposite side with deadly weapons wherein Shankarbhai @ Salim Dudabhai Parmar was having Axe in his hand, accused Vinodbhai Dudabhai Parmar was having wooded log in his hand, accused Rajubhai Chaturbhai Parmar was having scythe in his hand and accused Kishorbhai Chaturbhai Parmar was having iron pipe his hand and started quarrel with them. The accused Rajubhai Chaturbhai Parmar inflicted a scythe blow on the head of the uncle of the complainant. The said Rajubhai Chaturbhai Parmar also inflicted scythe blow on the head of Krunalbhai Rameshbhai due to which he fell down. Accused Kishanbhai @ Kishor inflicted a pipe blow on the head of the complainant. Accused Kishorbhai and Rajubhai also inflicted blows to the mother of the complainant on the different parts of her body. Accused Vinodbhai Dudabhai also very randomly inflicted blows with the wooden log to us. Thereafter, as the other relatives reached at the place of incident, all the accused persons left the place by administering thereat of dire consequences. Thereafter, the mother and sister-in-law of the complainant took him to the Government Hospital at Dhragandhra and thereafter shifted to the C.U. Shah Hospital, Surendrangar for further treatment. The uncle of the complainant Rameshbhai Khimjibhai Parmar, the mother of the complainant and the cousin brother of the complainant, namely, Krunal were also brought to the C.U. Shah Hospital, Surendranagar for the purpose of treatment who were admitted in the hospital. It is also alleged in the complaint that the reason behind occurrence of the said incident was that almost about four years ago from the date of the incident, all the accused persons used to sit in the

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
        whatsapp-icon Back to top