Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; pretrial detention should not equate to conviction, emphasizing personal liberty under Article 21.

ORDER :

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent State.

2. The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11215006240381 of 2024 registered with Borsad City Police Station, District Anand for the offences punishable under Sections 299, 325, 61(2) (A) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and section 8(2) of the Gujarat Animal (Prevention) Act, 1954.

3. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. The applicant is not named in FIR. The only allegation against the applicant is that he has sold the cow and there is no direct allegation as regards slaughtering of cow in the entire charge-sheet papers. Further, investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed and therefore, now detention of applicant is not required. Co-accused are enlarged on regular bail. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application and submitted that, one Lalitaben is owner of cow and she has handed over the cow to one Mukeshbhai and without her consent, it was subsequently sold to the co-accused, who slaughtered the cow and thrown its head in the canal. Sufficient material is collected during investigation. Therefore, he requested to dismiss the present application for regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

5. While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.

6. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects have been considered:

(1) Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;

(2) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life sentence or death penalty;

(3) Applicant is behind the bars since 02.09.2024;

(4) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;

(5) The applicant is not having any past antecedent;

(6) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take some time;

(7) Co-accused are released on bail by this Court and therefore, in view of decision of this Court in the case of Ramesh Batubhai Dabhi vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2011 (3) GLR 1150, applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity.

7. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously