IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 5747 of 2025 ==========================================================
GOPAL MITHAILAL GUPTA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. SURAJ A SHUKLA(7185) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. VRUNDA C. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 19/03/2025
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. 11210055250145 of 2025 registered with Salabatpura Police Station, Surat.
2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent – State.
Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent - State.
3. 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.
4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that the investigation of the offence is still in progress. The Applicant was very much part of the cartel which has been formed by the other co-accused for commission of the offence in question and the Applicant being the member of the said cartel had also actively participated in commission of the offence in question. The Applicant had taken the first informant and the other victims to the store where the alleged incident and the offence has been committed. 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.
5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. As per the case of the prosecution, the role attributed to the Applicant is to the effect that the Applicant being the Driver of the Auto Rickshaw had taken the first informant and the other victims to the mobile store where the first informant and the victims were asked to hand over their Aadhar Cards and Bank Pass Books etc. for the purpose of availing the loan facility. Except this no other overt act has been attributed to the present Applicant. Considering this aspect, 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 28.01.2025.
(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.
6. 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 the following conditions that he shall:
(a) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.
(b) maintain law and order and not to indulge in any criminal activities.
(c) furnish the documentary proof of complete, correct an
The court granted bail based on the Applicant's limited role in the alleged crime, good reputation, and absence of risk of flight or witness tampering.
The court emphasized the balance between the severity of the offence and the rights of the accused, allowing bail based on the Applicant's reputation and the victims' stable condition.
The court determined that the applicant's non-involvement in inflicting injury and lack of flight risk justified granting bail despite the serious nature of the offence.
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.
The court emphasized that the role of the accused as a facilitator rather than a principal offender, alongside the absence of flight risk, justified the granting of bail under specified conditions.
The court granted bail considering the applicant's reputation, duration of custody, and similarity to a co-accused's case, emphasizing the need for conditions to ensure compliance.
The court granted bail due to the completion of the investigation, lack of necessity for the applicant's presence, and no imminent trial, emphasizing the need to consider the nature of allegations ag....
The court ruled that prolonged incarceration without trial progress warrants bail, emphasizing the importance of timely justice.
The court established that bail can be granted by considering the applicant's reputation, absence of prior offenses, and the nature of allegations, while imposing strict conditions to mitigate risks.
The court granted bail based on insufficient evidence linking the applicant to the crime, emphasizing the need for a prima facie case.
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.