HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
NIMBARAM CHENARAM (NEEBARAM CHENARAM CHAUDHARI) – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 25696 of 2024
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 409, 420, 120B and 34 - Anticipatory bail application - The applicant, accused of supplying contraband liquor, has no past antecedents and is willing to cooperate with the investigation - The court emphasizes the need for careful discretion in bail applications, considering the nature of the accusation and the applicant's circumstances. (Paras 1.0, 4.0, 5.0)
(B) Bail - Principles governing anticipatory bail - The court must weigh the gravity of the accusation, the applicant's antecedents, and the potential for flight from justice - The court should avoid detailed examination of evidence at this stage. (Paras 4.0, 5.0)
Facts of the case:
The applicant seeks anticipatory bail in connection with FIR for serious offences, asserting no involvement in the crime and no past criminal record. The state opposed bail, citing the gravity of the allegations.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the bail application, directing the applicant to be released on bail with specific conditions, emphasizing cooperation with the investigation.
Issues: The main issues included the applicant's involvement in the alleged crime and the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's lack of past criminal record and willingness to cooperate with the investigation warranted the granting of anticipatory bail, reaffirming established principles.
Result: Application allowed.
ORDER :
RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat.
1. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11195050240493 of 2024 registered with Tharad Police Station, Dist. Banaskantha, for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 120B and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence. The applicant has no past antecedent. Allegation against the applicant is that, he is alleged supplier of contraband liquor. Therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. He has submitted that the applicant in connivance with other accused involved in supplying and selling the liquor. Therefore, custodial interrogation is required. Hence, application does not deserve any consideration.
4. Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court on the point. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are (i) the nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects.
(1) Nothing is found from conscious possession of the applicant.
(2) Allegation against the applicant is that, he is alleged supplier. Except this, no role is attributed to the applicant.
(3) Applicant is running his medical store.
(4) Applicant has no past antecedent.
(5) He is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation.
5. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and propositions laid down in cases of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273; Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Md. Asfak Alam vs. State of Jharkhand and Another reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 892, I am inclined to allow the present application.
6. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest / appearance of the applicant in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11195050240493 of 2024 registered with Tharad Police Station, Dist. Banaskantha, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that applicant:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever re
The court granted anticipatory bail based on the applicant's lack of criminal history and willingness to cooperate with the investigation, emphasizing careful discretion in bail applications.
Anticipatory bail may be granted if the applicant is not named in the FIR, has no requirement for custodial interrogation, and poses no flight risk.
The court granted anticipatory bail, emphasizing the need for careful discretion in evaluating the nature of accusations and the applicant's background, particularly in commercial disputes.
Anticipatory bail may be granted when the applicant demonstrates non-involvement in the offence and willingness to cooperate with the investigation, considering the nature of the charges and absence ....
Anticipatory bail granted based on applicant's cooperation with investigation and absence of prior criminal record, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail matters.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when there are no direct allegations against the applicant and they show willingness to cooperate with the investigation.
The court granted anticipatory bail, emphasizing the absence of direct allegations against the applicant and the necessity of judicial discretion in bail considerations.
Anticipatory bail granted due to lack of prima facie evidence against the applicant, emphasizing the need for judicious discretion in bail matters.
Anticipatory bail granted due to lack of connection to alleged offences and absence of prior convictions, emphasizing the necessity of judicial discretion in bail applications.
Anticipatory bail may be granted when the applicant cooperates with the investigation, has no prior convictions, and the nature of accusations does not necessitate custodial interrogation.
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.