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) 556

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY, J
DHARMENDRA @ DHAMO JAGDISHBHAI MER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 3194 of 2025



Petitioner Advocates:MR. NIPUL H GONDALIA(6894) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

The court ruled that bail may be granted considering the nature of allegations, the applicant's role in the offense, and the absence of direct fatal involvement.

Headnote:

(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - The applicant, involved in a case of alleged homicide, contends that continued imprisonment serves no purpose, while the prosecution argues against bail due to the applicant's motive and involvement in the crime - The court considers factors such as the nature of the allegations, the applicant's custody duration, and the absence of direct injury attribution to the applicant - Bail granted with conditions. (Paras 2, 5, 8)

(B) Bail Considerations - The court outlines three key factors for bail: prima facie case, availability at trial, and risk of witness tampering - The applicant's willingness to comply with conditions is noted. (Paras 7)

Facts of the case:
The applicant seeks bail in connection with FIR C.R. No. 11189003241085 for allegedly assaulting a deceased individual, reportedly motivated by a personal affair. The applicant asserts a good reputation and readiness to comply with bail conditions. (Paras 2, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court finds that the applicant's role, primarily involving stick blows rather than fatal knife injuries, justifies bail. The applicant has been in custody since July 11, 2024. (Paras 6, 8)

Issues: The main issues include the applicant's motive, the nature of the assault, and the appropriateness of granting bail under the circumstances. (Paras 5, 8)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes the need to consider the nature of the allegations and the applicant's circumstances, ruling that the applicant's release on bail is justified given the lack of direct fatal involvement. (Paras 8)

Result: The application for bail is granted with specific conditions imposed. (Paras 8, 12)

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. 11189003241085 of 2024 registered with ‘A’ Division Morbi City Police Station. Morbi.

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 applicant had a strong motive for commission of the offence in question as the deceased was having an affair with his wife. Actively participated.. The present applicant had assaulted the victim and had given several stick blows to him which had contributed to the death 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.

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. As per the case of prosecution, before dying, the deceased had made an oral dying declaration before witness Maqbul Hanifbhai Kasmani and in the said dying declaration the deceased had stated that knife injuries were inflicted upon him by the other co-accused namely Narendra and the said knife injuries, as per the P.M.Note had resulted into death of the deceased. No knife injuries has been attributed to the present applicant. The role attributed to the present applicant in commission of the offence is to the effect that the applicant had given stick blows to the deceased. 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 11.7.2024.

(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.

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 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 the applicant 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 crimin

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