Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MRM
MEMUNABEN AKBAR KHALIFA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
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. 11205013240469 of 2024 registered with Mankuva Police Station, Kachchh.
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. Darshan M. Varandani 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 inter alia contending that the Applicant had actively participated in commission of the offence in question. The
The absence of direct evidence linking the Applicant to the crime, alongside consideration of bail factors, justified the granting of bail.
The court granted bail considering the nature of allegations, the applicant's custody duration, and the absence of flight risk, imposing strict conditions for release.
The court emphasized that insufficient evidence of direct involvement and the applicant's good reputation justified granting bail under Section 483 of the BNSS.
The court granted bail based on the Applicant's role in abetting the offence, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent interference with the investigation.
The court granted bail based on the Applicant's circumstances, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent witness tampering and maintain law and order.
The court established that a limited role in the alleged crime and lack of substantial evidence can justify granting bail, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of bail applications.
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.
The court granted bail based on the similarity of the Applicant's role to a co-accused granted bail, emphasizing the need for consideration of the nature of allegations and custody duration.
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 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.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
