HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY, J
SUNILBHAI BHODUBHAI RATHVA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 6088 of 2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Application for Regular Bail - The applicant seeks bail in connection with a FIR for storing contraband liquor valued at Rs.4,28,174/- - The applicant has prior antecedents but claims good reputation and willingness to abide by conditions. (Paras 2, 4, 5)
(B) Factors for Bail - The court considers three primary factors: prima facie case, availability of the applicant at trial, and potential tampering with witnesses - The applicant has been in custody since 8.1.2025 and is not likely to flee. (Paras 7, 8)
(C) Conditions of Bail - The applicant is released on bail subject to multiple conditions including maintaining law and order and not leaving the jurisdiction without permission. (Paras 8, 10)
Findings of Court:
The application for bail is allowed based on the nature of allegations and the applicant's cooperation.
Issues: The main issue addressed is whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the gravity of the offense and past antecedents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant should be granted bail under specific conditions despite prior offenses, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach in bail applications.
Result: Application for bail allowed.
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. 11207055240771 of 2024 registered with Rajgadh Police Station. Panchmahal.
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 there are 7 other antecedents against the present applicant for commission of similar nature of offences. The present applicant had concealed huge stock of contraband liquor in his house. 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. The present applicant is alleged to have stored the stock of contraband liquor worth Rs.4,28,174/- at his house. 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 8.1.2025.
(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. 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 criminal activities.
(c) 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 the residence without prior permission of the trial Court.
(d) 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) file an affidavit stating his immovable properties whether self acquired or ancestral with description, location and present value
The court emphasized the importance of assessing bail applications based on the nature of allegations, prior conduct, and the applicant's likelihood of appearing for trial.
The court granted bail considering the nature of allegations, applicant's custody duration, and imposed conditions to prevent tampering with evidence.
The court granted bail considering the nature of the offence and the applicant's willingness to comply with conditions, emphasizing the balance between individual rights and public interest.
The court emphasized that bail considerations involve evaluating the prima facie case, risk of flight, and potential tampering with evidence, allowing bail under strict conditions.
The court granted bail based on the applicant's circumstances, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure compliance with legal obligations.
In the absence of substantial evidence linking the applicant to the alleged crime, bail may be granted, considering the applicant's compliance with conditions and lack of flight risk.
The court established that bail may be granted when continued detention is unjustified, considering the nature of allegations and evidence presented.
The court granted bail under Section 483 of BNSS, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure the applicant's presence at trial.
The court granted bail under Section 483 of BNSS, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure the applicant's availability for trial.
The court established that bail can be granted by considering the nature of allegations, the applicant's reputation, and compliance with specific conditions to ensure trial integrity.
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.