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) 386

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 4019 of 2025 ==========================================================
JAGDISHBHAI KALUBHAI VASAVA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HANNAN A QURESHI for MR FARAJKHAN N PATHAN(11559) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. VRUNDA SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 19/03/2025

Petitioner Advocates:MR HANNAN A QURESHI(11351) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

The court granted bail based on the nature of the offence and the applicant's custody status, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent tampering with evidence.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - The applicant was charged with driving a vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, resulting in a fatal accident - The court considered the nature of the offence and the applicant's custody status before granting bail - Conditions imposed include maintaining law and order and not tampering with evidence. (Paras 2, 5, 6, 7)

(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail - The court must assess the prima facie case, the likelihood of the applicant fleeing, and the potential for witness tampering - The applicant's custody duration and the nature of allegations were also considered. (Paras 6, 7)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was involved in a fatal accident while driving a dumper on the wrong side of the road at excessive speed, leading to the death of another individual. The applicant has been in custody since 28.11.2024.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the nature of the allegations warranted the exercise of discretion to grant bail, subject to specific conditions to ensure compliance and prevent interference with the investigation.

Issues: The main issues included the nature of the offence, the applicant's custody status, and the conditions necessary for granting bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's continued custody was not justified given the circumstances, and that bail could be granted with appropriate conditions to ensure compliance and prevent tampering with evidence.

Result: Application allowed; the applicant is ordered to be released on bail.

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.11199057240823 of 2024 registered with Rajpardi Police Station, District Bharuch.

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 was driving the vehicle i.e. dumper on a wrong side of the road in a excessive speed because of the same the accident occurred wherein deceased succumbed to injuries sustained by him. 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. Investigation is over and Charge-sheet has already been filed. It is alleged against the present applicant that he was driving the vehicle on a wrong side of the road in excessive speed in rash and negligent manner and because of the same, the accident had occurred wherein the deceased had lost his life. Having regard to the nature of offence, the present application deserves consideration.

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 28.11.2024.

(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/- (Ten Thousand) 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

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