Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY, J
MOIUDDIN @ MOIN BAPU YASINMIYA SAIYED – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11201002240011 of 2024 registered with CID Crime, Ahmedabad Zone Police Station, District:Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 489A, 489B, 489C, 489D, 34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Saquib S. Ansari appearing for the applicant and learned APP Ms.Divyangna Jhala for the Respondent – State.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that in the present offence, investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. The present applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 14.6.2024 and since then the applicant is in custody.
3.1 Earlier the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Application No.20955 of 2024 which came to be dismissed by this court vide order dated 24.10.2024. In the said order this court had referred to the statement of the wife of the co-accused who had identified the present applicant and had stated that the applicant had gone to her house to meet her husband, who is the co-accused.
3.2 After the
Repeated bail applications require significant changes in circumstances; attempts to tamper with evidence justify denial of bail.
The court denied bail due to insufficient evidence linking the applicant to the crime and previous misuse of temporary bail.
The court denied bail based on the applicant's presence at the crime scene and the prosecution's evidence, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges under the BNS Act.
The court denied bail due to substantial evidence of the applicant's involvement in serious offences, emphasizing the gravity of the charges.
The court emphasized that bail should not be granted if there is a strong likelihood of witness tampering and the accused is charged with a serious offence.
The court emphasized that bail is a discretionary remedy, particularly in serious offences like murder, where credible evidence suggests premeditated intent.
The court granted bail based on insufficient evidence against the Applicant and the consideration of bail conditions, emphasizing the importance of a prima facie case.
Bail is a rule and jail is an exception; personal liberty under Article 21 must be upheld, especially when the charge-sheet is filed and no recovery is needed.
Point of law: There is no doubt that the grant or denial of bail is entirely the discretion of the judge considering a case but even so, the exercise of judicial discretion has been circumscribed by ....
Bail can be granted when the accused is not present during the alleged crime, and no charges are filed against co-accused despite specific allegations.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
