HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY, J
VIJAYBHAI RAMSUBHAI DAMOR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 4821 of 2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Bail application - The applicant, a Government servant, sought regular bail in connection with a serious offence. The court considered the nature of the allegations, the applicant's custody since 14.06.2024, and the precedent set in Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I. - The court found it appropriate to exercise discretion in favor of bail. (Paras 2, 5, 6, 7)
(B) Bail considerations - The court outlined three key factors: prima facie case, availability of the accused during trial, and potential for witness tampering. (Para 6)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was arrested in connection with a serious offence as a Government servant. The application for bail was prompted by the nature of the allegations and the applicant's ongoing custody. (Paras 4, 6)
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the bail application, subject to various conditions aimed at ensuring compliance and maintaining law and order. (Paras 7, 8)
Issues: The main issues included the seriousness of the charges against the applicant and the appropriateness of granting bail under the circumstances. (Para 4)
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the applicant's circumstances warranted bail, emphasizing the need for discretion in such matters, while also considering the precedent set by the Supreme Court. (Para 7)
Result: Application allowed; applicant released on bail with conditions.
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.11821053240675 of 2024 registered with Dahod Town ‘B’ Division Police Station, District Dahod
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 herein had actively participated in commission of offence in question as the applicant is a Government servant. 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. Attention of this Court has been drawn to the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the application filed by one Shaishav Shirishkumar Parikh, who is the main accused as cited by the prosecution, was ordered to be enlarged on bail in another F.I.R. registered for similar offence. Having regard to the same, 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 14.06.2024.
(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 OfÏcer 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 OfÏcer 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 afÏdavit 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 AfÏdavit 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
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 may grant bail considering the nature of the offence, completion of investigation, and risk of flight, imposing necessary conditions to ensure compliance.
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 established the criteria for bail consideration under Section 483, emphasizing the need for lawful conduct and compliance with trial procedures.
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 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 may grant bail under Section 439 considering the nature of the offence, previous absences, and ensuring the accused's presence at trial.
The court granted bail based on the applicant's limited involvement in the offence and the completion of the investigation, emphasizing the need for strict conditions to prevent interference with the....
The court granted bail based on the applicant's custody duration and lack of flight risk, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent tampering with evidence.
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.
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.