The court held that contradictions in witness statements do not justify bail when the nature of the crime is severe and no change in circumstances is presented.

ORDER :

1. 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. 11210070240144 of 2024 registered with Bhestan Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 504 and 506 of the IPC.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that in present offence, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 09.03.2024 and since then he is in custody. He further submitted that the applicant had earlier preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.12065 of 2024, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 16.08.2024. However, thereafter, there is no progress in the trial. Moreover, after the dismissal of the earlier application, certain documents have come to notice of the present applicant, wherein it is categorically stated by the witness that the applicant herein had inflicted one blow fist blow on the chest of the deceased, and thereafter, an improved version has been given by the said person in the FIR that the present applicant had inflicted kicks and fist blows on the chest and abdomen area of the deceased. Thus, there is starc contradiction in the version given by the first informant in his statement dated 09.03.2024 and the version, which had been recorded in the FIR thereafter. He, therefore, submitted to allow the present application and enlarge the present applicant on bail subject to suitable conditions.

3. Learned APP has opposed the present application, inter alia, contending that the earlier, the present applicant had preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.12065 of 2024, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 16.08.2024, and thereafter, there is no change in circumstances. He, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.

4. Learned advocate for the original complainant has opposed the present application.

5. At the outset, it is required to be noted that the applicant had earlier preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.12065 of 2024, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 16.08.2024. While dismissing the said application, this Court had observed as under:-

"4. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the material available on record. In present case, the investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. From the record, it appears that the present applicant had posted some material on one social media platform, which was derogatory to the image of some relative of the deceased, and therefore, the deceased had gone to the place of the present applicant to ask for an explanation for the said post. After the deceased reached at the place, some altercation had taken place between the parties, wherein the present applicant had assaulted the deceased with kicks and fist blows. The blows given by the present applicant to the deceased were so severe that because of the same, the liver and right kidney of the deceased got ruptured and the same had resulted into the death of the deceased. Having regard to the same, no case is made out to release the present appellant on bail. Hence, the present appeal stands dismissed."

6. Thereafter, there is no change in circumstances. So far as the contradictions, which are sought to be canvassed by the learned advocate for the applicant can be taken care of at the time of trial. Having regard to these aspects, no case is made out to release the present applicant on bail. Hence, the present application stands dismissed.