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) 476

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 19186 of 2024 ==========================================================
RAJU @ SITARAM NARAYAN DHOTRE Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TEJAS BAROT, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MS RHEA CHOKSHI(10808) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR PRATIK Y JASANI(5325) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 12/03/2025

Petitioner Advocates:MS RHEA CHOKSHI(10808) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

The court granted bail based on the applicant's prolonged incarceration and lack of trial progress, emphasizing fairness in similar cases.

Headnote:(A) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023 - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - Applicant arrested on 22.05.2019, in custody since then - Investigation complete, charge-sheet filed, but trial not progressing with 82 witnesses pending - Court considers parity with co-accused granted bail - Opposed by prosecution citing active participation in the offence - Court finds fit case for bail based on incarceration duration. (Paras 3, 6, 8, 9)

(B) Bail - Conditions for bail - Applicant must not misuse liberty, obstruct investigation, or leave the state without permission - Court retains discretion to modify conditions. (Paras 9, 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
The applicant has been in custody since May 2019 for aiding a sharp shooter in a criminal offence. The trial is delayed due to the prosecution's need to examine numerous witnesses.

Findings of Court:
The court finds that the applicant's prolonged incarceration warrants bail, considering the lack of trial progress and the status of co-accused.

Issues: The main issues were the applicant's role in the offence, the delay in trial, and the appropriateness of granting bail based on parity with co-accused.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's long period of incarceration, coupled with the lack of trial progress, justified the granting of bail, emphasizing the need for fairness in similar cases.

Result: The present application is allowed.

ORDER :

(M. R. MENGDEY, J.) 

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

2. The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023, for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.NO. 3 of 2019 registered with Gandhidham Railway Police Station, Ahmedabad West Railway Police Station.

3. Learned Senior Advocate for the applicant has submitted that in present offence, the investigation is over and charge- sheet has been filed. The applicant herein has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 22.05.2019 and since then he is in custody. The trial of the offence in not progressing and still 82 witnesses are required to be examined by prosecution, and therefore, there is no likelihood of trial of the offence getting over in the near future.

3.1 Learned Senior Advocate for the applicant has submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has considered the other co-accused for grant of bail only on the ground of long incarceration. Having regard to the period of incarceration undergone by the present applicant, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the very same ground on parity with the other co-accused. Moreover, the main accused at whose behest the present offence has been allegedly committed is also considered for grant of bail by the Coordiante Bench of this Court. He, therefore, submitted to allow the present application and enlarge the present applicant on bail subject to suitable conditions.

4. Learned APP has opposed the present application, inter alia, contending that the present applicant had actively participated in commission of the offence in question, as he had helped shart shooter in commission of the offence in question. She, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.

5. Learned advocate for the original complainant has also opposed the present application, inter alia, contending that the trial has not been delayed because of any reason attributable to prosecution. In fact, the accused persons have been seeking adjournments on one ground or the other repeatedly, which has delayed the conclusion of trial. He, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.

6. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the material available on record. The applicant is arrested in connection with the present offence on 22.05.2019 and since then he is in custody. The role attributed to the present applicant in commission of the offence is to the effect that he had helped the other co-acccused viz. Shashikant Dadashanker Kamble, who is the sharp shooter. The record indicates that the said co-accused viz. Shashikant has been considered for grant of bail by this Court vide order dated 06.03.2025 on the ground of period of incarceration undergone by the said co-accused. The Coordinate Bench of this Court has considered the case of co- accused Chabilbhai Naranbhai Makani (Patel), who is the main conspirator in the present offence for grant of bail. As per the record, still 82 witnesses are required to be examined by the prosecution, and therefore, there is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in the near future. Having regard to the same, the present application deserves consideration.

7. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in [2012]1 SCC 40.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

9. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail, on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to

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