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) 562

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 4185 of 2025 ==========================================================
CHANDANBHAI DIPAKBHAI SOLANKI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YASH V GUPTA(11814) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 VISHAL K ANANDJIWALA(7798) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR VASHISTHA M JOSHI(8972) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR. K M ANTANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 20/03/2025

Petitioner Advocates:VISHAL K ANANDJIWALA(7798) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

The court granted bail considering the nature of allegations, the applicant's relationship with the victim, and the absence of flight risk, emphasizing the need for conditions to ensure compliance.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - The applicant sought bail in connection with serious charges including physical abuse of a minor - The court considered the nature of the allegations and the relationship between the applicant and the prosecutrix. (Paras 2, 4, 6, 8)

(B) Bail - Factors for consideration - The court noted three key factors: prima facie case, availability of the applicant during trial, and risk of witness tampering - The applicant was in custody since 02.02.2025 and was not likely to flee. (Paras 7, 8)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was accused of sexually assaulting a minor, leading to severe mental distress for the prosecutrix. The court acknowledged the intimate relationship between the applicant and the prosecutrix.

Findings of Court:
The court found it appropriate to grant bail, imposing conditions to ensure compliance and prevent interference with the trial process.

Issues: The main issues included the seriousness of the charges and the applicant's relationship with the prosecutrix.

Ratio Decidendi: The court exercised discretion to grant bail based on the nature of the allegations and the applicant's custody status, emphasizing that the trial court should not be influenced by prima facie observations made in this order.

Result: Application for bail allowed.

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.11213042250048 of 2025 registered with Paddhari Police Station, District Rajkot Rural.

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 herein had subjected the prosecutrix physical abuse and age of the prosecutrix was below 18 years at the relevant time. 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. Learned advocate appearing for the original complainant has also opposed the grant of present application inter-alia contending that the applicant had sexually assaulted the victim and had also caused mental harassment to the prosecutrix and because of the same, the prosecutrix was consumed phenyl. He has, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.

6. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant had subjected the prosecutrix physical abuse. However, from the material available on record it appears that the applicant and the prosecutrix were known to each other for quite sometime and were in relationship of intimate nature. Having regard to this aspect, the present application deserves consideration.

7. 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 02.02.2025.

(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.

8. 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 w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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