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

2025 Supreme(GUJ) 106

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY, J
ALPESHBHAI NATHUBHAI BARIYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 1209 of 2025



Petitioner Advocates:MR PRUTHVIRAJSINH V SOLANKI(10190) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

The court granted bail based on the applicant's good reputation, the nature of allegations, and compliance with specific conditions, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of bail factors.

Headnote:

(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - The applicant, with a good reputation, seeks bail in connection with a serious offence, arguing that continued detention serves no purpose. The prosecution contends that the applicant had established physical relations against the victim's will. The court considers the nature of the allegations and the applicant's custody duration before granting bail with specific conditions. (Paras 2, 5, 8, 12)

(B) Bail considerations - The court outlines three key factors for bail: prima facie case, availability of the accused, and potential witness tampering. The applicant's compliance with conditions is emphasized. (Paras 7, 8)

ORDER :

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of the Respondent State.

2. The Applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ) for enlarging the Applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11207024241143 of 2024 registered with Godhra Taluka Police Station. Panchmahal.

3. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent – State.

4. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant has good reputation in the society and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

5. Per contra, learned APP has vehemently opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that during the course of investigation, the statement of the prosecutrix had been recorded, wherein she had categorically stated that the applicant had established physical relations with her against her will. Learned APP therefore submitted that looking to the nature and gravity of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.

6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the record. Upon perusal of the statement of the prosecutrix recorded during the course of investigation it appears that the applicant and the victim were known to each other and were having a love affair and therefore, initially physical relations were established between the two with the consent of the prosecutrix herself who was aged around 17 years and 7 months at the relevant time. Considering the same, the application deserves consideration.

7. This court has considered the following aspects:

(a) As per catena of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, there are mainly 3 factors which are required to be considered by this court i.e. prima facie case, availability of Applicant accused at the time of trial and tampering and hampering with the witnesses by the accused.

(b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away.

(c) That the Applicant is in custody since 31.12.2024.

(d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I. Reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.

8. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perusing the record produced in this case as well as taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of accusation, availability of the Applicant Accused at the time of Trial etc. and the role attributed to the present Applicant accused, the present Application deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands allowed. This Court has also gone through the FIR and police papers and also the earlier order passed by the learned Sessions Court where the learned Sessions Judge has disallowed the bail Application at initial stage. The Applicant Accused is ordered to be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions that he shall:

(a) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.

(b) maintain law and order and not to indulge in any criminal activities.

(c) furnish the documentary proof of complete, correct and present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and to the Trial Court at the time of executing the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the trial Court.

(d) provide contact numbers as well as the contact numbers of the sureties before the Trial Court. In case of change in such n

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 Back to top