The court granted bail considering the applicant's prolonged custody and the nature of allegations, imposing conditions to ensure compliance and prevent tampering with evidence.

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. 11203024221051 of 2022 registered with Junagadh City ‘B’ Division Police Station. Junagadh.

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 the present applicant has actively participated in commission of the offence in question as it was the present applicant who had mixed cyanide in the water-bottle of the deceased. 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.

5.1 Learned Advocate appearing for the original complainant has also opposed the present application contending that the applicant had mixed cyanide in the water-bottle of the deceased, due to consumption of the said water, the deceased had died. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present application.

6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the record. From the record it appears that the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. At the outset it is required to be noted that earlier the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Application No.13062 of 2023 which had been allowed to be withdrawn by this court vide order dated 7.2.2024. While permitting the applicant to withdraw the said application, a liberty was granted to the applicant to file an application afresh after a period of nine months if the trial did not progress satisfactorily in the meantime. After filing of the present application, vide order dated 4.12.2024, this court had asked learned Sessions Court to submit its report as regards the current status of trial. Accordingly, learned Sessions Court has submitted its report which indicates that the charge against the present applicant and the other co-accused came to be framed only in the month of November, 2024. Still after framing of the charge, no witnesses have been examined. The prosecution has cited as many as 60 witnesses in the charge-sheet. The present applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence in the month of December, 2022. 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 3.12.2022.

(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 Tri