HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
PRAVINBHAI KESHARBHAI CHAUDHARI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 548 of 2025
(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Bail application - The applicant seeks regular bail in connection with serious offences involving fraud and financial misconduct. The court considers the nature of accusations, the applicant's role, and the absence of further recovery needed. (Paras 2, 5, 6, 8)
(B) Bail Jurisprudence - The court emphasizes that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, referencing the principle of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. (Paras 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The applicant is accused of defrauding individuals through a fraudulent investment scheme, allegedly receiving Rs.1.86 crores. The charge-sheet has been filed, and the applicant is not named in the FIR. (Paras 3, 6)
Findings of Court:
The court finds that the applicant's continued detention amounts to pre-trial conviction and that the conditions for bail are met. (Paras 7, 8)
Issues: The main issues include the applicant's involvement in the alleged fraud and the appropriateness of granting bail given the circumstances. (Paras 5, 6)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's detention is unwarranted given the circumstances and the principle that bail should be granted unless there is a substantial risk of tampering with evidence or absconding. (Paras 7, 8)
Result: The application for bail is allowed, and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail with specific conditions. (Paras 8, 12)
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.11206073240528 of 2024 registered with Vadnagar Smart Police Station, District Mahesana for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 319(2), 318(4) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and sections 66-C and 66-D of the Information Technology Act.
3. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence however, now nothing is required to be recovered or discovered as the charge-sheet is filed. The role attributed to the present applicant is that he used to make phone calls to various customers and lure them with huge and lucrative returns to invest in the scheme given by him and thereby he got transferred huge amount of moneys from the victims and witnesses to the accused of co-accused. It is alleged that the present applicant lured the customers by making temptations of unrealistic profit returns and has received huge amount from the victims and has received Rs.1.86 crores in total in the dummy bank account. It is further submitted that though the charge sheet has been filed, nothing more is required to be recovered or discovered. The present applicant without prejudice to the rights is ready and willing to show his bonafide and is ready deposit the balance amount of Rs.13,48,700/- with the learned trial Court Vadnagar subject to outcome of the trial for which undertaking on behalf of the applicant is filed. It is further submitted that the bank accounts has already been freezed. He therefore requested to allow the present application by imposing suitable conditions.
4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application and requested to dismiss the present application for regular bail on the ground that applicant is involved in a serious offence wherein large number of poor people are defrauded of crores of rupee and if the applicant is granted bail then the possibility of tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out as co-accused are yet to be arrested. Further, the accused persons in connivance and collusion of each other without there being any license of stock marketing or investment have lured many people to make investments for which dummy numbers were provided and thus huge amount of moneys have been siphoned. Further the investigation qua other monety trail is still going on and the applicant is involved in huge scam. Therefore, he has requested to dismiss the present application.
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) The allegation is that applicant used to make phone calls from the list which was provided to him
Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; personal liberty under Article 21 must be upheld unless substantial risks are present.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception, emphasizing personal liberty under Article 21, especially when the accused has no prior record and the trial may take time.
The principle that 'bail is a rule and jail is an exception' was upheld, emphasizing personal liberty and the need for careful consideration of bail applications.
Bail is the rule and pre-trial detention is the exception; courts must consider the nature of allegations and personal liberty under Article 21.
The court granted bail considering the nature of allegations, gravity of accusations, and the applicant's compliance with conditions, emphasizing the balance between rights and the severity of charge....
Bail is a rule and jail is an exception; courts must consider the nature of accusations and public interest when granting bail.
The court emphasized that bail is a rule and pre-trial detention is an exception, affirming the presumption of innocence and personal liberty under Article 21.
The court emphasized that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, considering the applicant's lack of prior offenses and willingness to deposit funds.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must consider the nature of allegations and personal liberty when deciding bail applications.
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.