Insufficient evidence linking the applicant to the crime justified the granting of bail, emphasizing the need for concrete proof in bail applications.

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.11193050240225 of 2024 registered with Rajula Police Station, Amreli.

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 actively participated in commission of the offence in question. The presence of the applicant has been captured in the C.C.T.V. footage and he is seen in the C.C.T.V. footages passing from the place of incident on a two wheeler. He further submitted that the applicant had assaulted the deceased with a stick and had inflicted several injuries to the deceased with the said stick. He, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.

5. Learned advocate for the original complainant has opposed the present application, inter alia, contending that the present applicant herein had a strong motive for commission of the present offence. The present applicant had assaulted the deceased with an iron rod. She further submitted that there are several lapses in the process of investigation and the original complainant has also lodged objections with regard to those lapses in the investigation with the concerned authorities and even the concerned Court and the concerned Court has also ordered the statement of one of the witnesses to be recorded under Sections 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, the said statement is not yet recorded. She further submitted that the C.C.T.V. footages, which have been captured during the investigation, have not been sent to the FSL for the reasons best known to the Investigating Officer. She further submitted that the original complainant and his family have been receiving constant threats from the accused persons and their family members for settling the issue in the present offence. She, therefore, submitted that if the applicant is ordered to be enlarged on bail, some untoward incident may take place. She, therefore, submitted to dismiss the present application.

6. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. In the present case, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. The present applicant has been named in the FIR as an unknown person. The role attributed to the present applicant is to the effect that the present applicant had inflicted a blow with the stick on the body of the deceased. However, there is no other material connecting the present applicant with the offence in question nor the applicant has been subjected to any Test Indentification Parade. The prosecution seeks to rely upon the C.C.T.V. footage, wherein the presence of the present applicant is seen. However, in the said C.C.T.V. footages, the present applicant herein is not seen inflicting any injury on the deceased. What is seen in the C.C.T.V. footage is that the applicant herein is passing through the place of incident on a two wheeler.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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