Bail may be granted even in serious offences if the applicant shows compliance willingness and no flight risk, emphasizing the need for a balanced assessment of case facts.

ORDER :

(M.R. MENGDEY, J.)

1. The Applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the Applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11210002243131 of 2024 registered with Sachin G.I.D.C. Police Station, Surat.

2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant, learned APP for the Respondent – State and learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Original Complainant.

3. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent - State and learned Advocate Mr. K.T.Beladiya waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Original Complainant.

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 opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that the Applicant had actively participated in commission of the offence in question as it was the Applicant who had given kicks and fist blows to the deceased. The Applicant had reached the place of incident along with the other co-accused with an intention of doing the deceased to death. Learned APP has therefore submitted that looking to the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the Application may be dismissed.

6. Learned Advocate Mr. K.T.Beladiya appearing on behalf of the Original Complainant has also opposed the Application contending that the Applicant is the resident of State of Bihar and had played an active role in commission of the offence in question. The Applicant had given kicks and fist blows to the deceased and if he had not acted in a manner as alleged in the FIR, the other co-accused would not have been in a position to impose a fatal blow upon the deceased.

7. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. The investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. As per the case of the prosecution the role attributed to the present Applicant is that, after reaching to the place of incident, the Applicant had inflicted kicks and fist blows to the deceased, whereas the knife injury had been inflicted by the other co-accused, who was accompanying the present Applicant. Having regard to the aforesaid aspects, the Application deserves consideration. 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 27.10.2024.

(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