HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY, J
DHANRAJ MURARSHA BHANDGE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 4836 of 2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - The applicant seeks bail in connection with serious offences including injury and robbery - The investigation is complete and charge-sheet filed, while co-accused granted bail - Court considers factors such as prima facie case, likelihood of fleeing, and tampering with witnesses - Application allowed with conditions imposed. (Paras 6 and 7)
(B) Bail - Considerations - The court must evaluate the severity of the charges, the risk of flight, and potential witness tampering when deciding on bail applications. (Paras 6 and 8)
Facts of the case:
The applicant is accused of inflicting injuries and robbery, with the investigation concluded and charge-sheet filed. Other co-accused have been granted bail.
Findings of Court:
The court finds the applicant eligible for bail, ordering release upon executing a bond with conditions.
Issues: The main issues include the nature of the offences, the applicant's risk of flight, and the status of co-accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the nature of the allegations and the completion of the investigation warranted the exercise of discretion to grant bail, emphasizing the importance of conditions to ensure compliance.
Result: Application for bail allowed.
ORDER :
M. R. MENGDEY, J.
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.
2. This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No.11203006240139 of 2024 registered with Bantva Police Station, District Junagadh.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that considering the nature of offence and role attributed to the applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
4. The learned APP appearing for the respondent State has vehemently submitted that the applicant had inflicted some injuries to the victim and looted valuable muddamal. Learned APP has, therefore, submitted that the offences which have been charged, are serious in nature and looking to the facts as well as the allegations levelled against the applicant, no discretion is required to be exercised.
5. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. From the record it appears that the investigation is over and Charge-sheet has already been filed. From the record it appears that the other co-accused who are similarly situated to the present applicant have been considered for grant of bail. Having regard to this aspect, the present application deserves to be allowed.
6. This court has also 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 09.09.2024.
(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 .
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made in the FIR and without discussing the evidence in details as well as without going into details, prima-facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion to enlarge the applicant on bail. Hence, the application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR, on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that;
(a) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.
(b) shall maintain law and order and not to indulge in any criminal activities.
(c) shall 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 residence without prior permission of the trial Court.
(d) shall provide contact numbers as well as the contact numbers of the sureties before the Trial Court. In case of change in such numbers inform in writing immediately to the trial Court.
(e) shall file an affidavit stating immovable properties whether self acquired or ancestral with description, location and present value of such properties before the Trial Court, if any.
(f) shall not leave India without prior permission of the Trial Court (g) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week. If accused does not possess passport, shall file an Affidavit to that effect.
(h) shall mark presence before the concerned police station once in a month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.
8. The authorities concerned shall release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any
The court may grant bail considering the nature of the offence, completion of investigation, and risk of flight, imposing necessary conditions to ensure compliance.
The court established that bail may be granted based on the nature of allegations, custody duration, and precedents, emphasizing judicial discretion in such matters.
The court granted bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure the applicant's presence during t....
The court granted bail based on the completion of investigation and the applicant's custody status, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent tampering with evidence.
The court emphasized the balance between individual liberty and public interest in bail applications, allowing bail based on the completion of investigation and the nature of allegations.
The court established the criteria for bail consideration under Section 483, emphasizing the need for lawful conduct and compliance with trial procedures.
The court may grant bail under Section 483 considering the nature of the offence, the applicant's antecedents, and the need to prevent tampering with evidence.
The court may grant bail under Section 439 considering the nature of the offence, previous absences, and ensuring the accused's presence at trial.
The court emphasized the need for discretion in granting bail, considering the applicant's compliance with conditions and the nature of the allegations.
Bail can be granted considering the nature of the offence, provided conditions are imposed to ensure presence and compliance during the trial.
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.