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) 789

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 5562 of 2025 ==========================================================
DEBJYOTI DIPAK DASGUPTA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BC DAVE(245) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR KANVA M. ANTANI, APP for the Respondent No.1 ==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 20/03/2025

Petitioner Advocates:MR BC DAVE(245) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

The court granted bail based on the applicant's custody status and the nature of allegations, emphasizing the need for conditions to ensure trial integrity.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - The applicant is accused of providing raw material for spurious liquor, with serious charges and ongoing trial involving numerous witnesses - The court considered factors such as the nature of the allegations and the applicant's custody status. (Paras 2, 5, 6)

(B) Bail - Factors for consideration - The court emphasized the need to assess prima facie case, the likelihood of the accused fleeing, and potential witness tampering - The applicant was deemed not likely to flee and was in judicial custody. (Paras 6, 7)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was arrested on 3.10.2017 in connection with serious charges related to spurious liquor, with a significant number of witnesses examined.

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

Issues: The main issues included the nature of the allegations and the appropriateness of granting bail given the ongoing trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's continued custody was not warranted given the circumstances, allowing bail with specific conditions to ensure trial integrity.

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.III/3 of 2017 registered with Katargam Police Station, District Surat.

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 provided raw material for preparing of spurious liquor because of consumption in diet. Thus, there is an active participation on the part of the present applicant in commission of offence. Learned APP has further submitted that trial of the offence has commenced and as many as 35 to 40 witnesses have been examined as of now. 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. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. From the record it appears that the investigation is over and Charge-sheet has already been filed. The applicant has been arrested in connection of the present offence on 3.10.2017 and since then he is in custody. The prosecution has cited as many as 102 witnesses in the Charge-sheet and out of them, 35-40 witnesses have been examined as of now. Having regard to this fact, the present application deserves to be allowed.

6. 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 judicial custody.

(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.

7. 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/- 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 the territory of Gujarat State without prior permission of the Trial Court (g) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a wee

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