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) 941

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 5855 of 2025 ==========================================================
JASWINDAR @ VICKY MANGALSINGH ROMANA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KISHAN R CHAKWAWALA(9846) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. VIRAJ HARGOVIND DESAI(14245) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS DIVYANGNA JHALA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY Date : 21/03/2025

Petitioner Advocates:MR KISHAN R CHAKWAWALA(9846) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

The court granted bail based on the nature of the allegations and the discretion to ensure compliance with conditions, referencing established legal principles.

Headnote:(A) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023 - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - The applicant is accused of issuing fake tickets for travel abroad after collecting money from the first informant and other witnesses - The prosecution opposed bail, citing active participation in the offence and ongoing investigation - The court considered the nature of the offence and the fact that co-accused were granted bail - The court referenced the ruling in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, [2012] 1 SCC 40 - The court found it appropriate to exercise discretion in favor of bail, imposing conditions to ensure compliance and protect the investigation. (Paras 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was accused of collecting money from individuals wanting to travel abroad and issuing fake tickets, leading to the FIR.

Findings of Court:
The court determined that the applicant should be granted bail, subject to specific conditions to prevent misuse of liberty.

Issues: The main issues included the nature of the offence, the applicant's participation, and the appropriateness of bail given ongoing investigations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the nature of the allegations warranted bail, emphasizing the need for conditions to safeguard the investigation.

Result: Application for bail allowed.

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. 11200010241864 of 2024 registered with Valsad Town Police Station, Valsad.

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 appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application, inter alia, contending that the present applicant had actively participated in commission of the offence in question. The first informant and the other witnesses had approached the present applicant for traveling to Maldivs and the present applicant had collected money from them and had issued fake tickets to them. He further submitted that the investigation of the offence is still in progress. She, 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. As per the case of prosecution, the first informant and other witnesses had approached the present applicant, as they wanted to travel abroad and the applicant after having collected the amount is alleged to have issued fake tickets to them. Having regard to the nature of offence and the allegations levelled against the present applicant so also, the fact that the other co-accused have been considered for grant of bail by this Court, 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 be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.

11. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Direct service is permitted.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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