HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY, J
RAJNEESH BABBAR S/O GULSHAN KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 4871 of 2025
(A) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023 - Section 483 - Application for regular bail in connection with FIR C.R.NO. 11195003240889 - The applicant is accused of supplying contraband charas worth 870 grams, with evidence captured on CCTV - The investigation is complete, and a charge-sheet has been filed - The court finds it appropriate to grant bail considering the nature of allegations and the completion of investigation. (Paras 2, 5, 7, 8)
(B) Bail - Conditions for bail - The applicant must execute a personal bond and comply with specific conditions to ensure he does not misuse his liberty or obstruct the investigation. (Paras 8, 9)
Facts of the case:
The applicant is accused of supplying contraband charas, with evidence of the transaction captured on CCTV. The investigation is complete, and the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant and co-accused.
Findings of Court:
The court finds it fit to exercise discretion in granting bail, emphasizing that the trial court should not be influenced by preliminary observations made during the bail hearing.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the nature of the allegations and the evidence against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the completion of the investigation and the nature of the allegations warranted the exercise of discretion to grant bail, while imposing conditions to safeguard the prosecution's interests.
Result: The present application is allowed.
ORDER :
(M. R. MENGDEY, J.)
1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.
2. The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit , 2023, for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.NO. 11195003240889 of 2024 registered with Amirgadh Police Station, Banaskantha
3. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
4. Learned APP has opposed the present application, inter alia, contending that the present applicant had supplied the stock of contraband charas worth 870 Grams to the other co- accused from whose conscious possession the same had been recovered. The exchange of the contraband substance has been captured in the C.C.T.V. footage of the mall wherein it has taken place. The applicant herein had travelled in his own car for supply of the said contraband substance and the car of the present applicant has also been captured in the C.C.T.V. footage. He, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.
5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. In present case, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. As per the case of prosecution, the co-accused was found in conscious possession of contraband substance of Charas worth 870 Grams, which was an intermidiate quantity and the said stock of contraband substance had been supplied by the present applicant.
6. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation , reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 .
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail, on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;
(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution & shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week;
(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Trial Court concerned;
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(f) furnish the present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of Trial Court;
9. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
10. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.
11. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
The court granted bail based on the completion of the investigation and the nature of allegations, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent misuse of liberty.
The court exercised discretion to grant bail under Section 483, emphasizing the nature of allegations and imposing conditions to ensure compliance and protect the investigation.
The court held that the absence of prior criminal records and the nature of allegations justified granting bail, emphasizing discretion in such cases.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence connecting the applicant to the offence, emphasizing the need for substantial proof in bail applications.
The court granted bail based on the applicant's lack of prior offenses and the completion of the investigation, emphasizing the need for discretion in such matters.
The court granted bail based on the completion of the investigation and the applicant's lack of prior criminal record, imposing conditions to ensure compliance.
The court granted regular bail under specific conditions, emphasizing the need to prevent misuse of liberty and ensure cooperation with ongoing investigations.
Insufficient evidence connecting the applicant to the offence justified the granting of bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023.
The court granted bail based on the lack of trial progress and the applicant's custody duration, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent misuse of liberty.
The court granted regular bail based on the completion of investigation and the nature of allegations, imposing specific conditions to ensure compliance.
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.