The court granted bail based on prolonged custody and ongoing trial status, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent misuse of liberty.

ORDER :

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. 11195008201056 of 2020 registered with Bhildi 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 trial of the offence is in progress and out of 46 witnesses 14 witnesses have already been examined and the remaining witnesses will be examined in the near future. He further submits that the present applicant is the main accused. The role attributed to the other co-accused, who have been considered for grant of bail is altogether different from the role attributed to the present applicant, and therefore, the aspect of parity would not be applicable to the present applicant. 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. This Court, vide order dated 05.02.2025, had directed the concerned Trial Court to submit its report as regard the current status of trial. Accordingly, the concerned Trial Court has submitted its report, which indicates that out of 46 witnesses cited by prosecution, 14 witnesses have been examined. The applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 05.02.2021 and since then he is in custody. Thus, the applicant has undergone incarceration of more than 4 years. The trial of the offence is not likely to conclude in near future. Having regard to the fact that number of witnesses yet to be examined so also, the fact that the other co-accused have been considered for grant of bail, the present application deserves consideration.

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