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) 1166

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.
Sujalbhai S/o Pratapbhai Dasabhai Maru - Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Misc. Application (For Anticipatory Bail) No. 4348 of 2025
Decided On : 03-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Denish V. Mavadhiya
For the Respondent: H.K. Patel

Anticipatory bail may be granted when there is no direct evidence of instigation and the applicant is willing to cooperate with the investigation.

Headnote:

(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - Anticipatory bail - Application for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR for offences under Sections 323, 307 and 114 of IPC - Applicant claimed false implication and readiness to cooperate with investigation - Court considered factors such as nature of accusation, antecedents of applicant, and possibility of fleeing from justice - No direct evidence of instigation found against the applicant - Application allowed with conditions. (Paras 1.1, 4, 6, 7)

(B) Bail - Principles governing anticipatory bail - The court must exercise discretion judiciously, considering the gravity of the accusation and the applicant's conduct - The threshold for invoking Section 306 IPC must be approached with caution to avoid misuse. (Paras 4, 6)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, a college student, was accused of blackmailing the deceased, who subsequently committed suicide. The applicant claimed no involvement and readiness to join the investigation. (Paras 2, 3)

Findings of Court:
The court found no direct evidence of instigation by the applicant and noted the absence of material suggesting the applicant's culpability. (Paras 4, 6)

Issues: The main issues included the applicant's involvement in the alleged offences and the necessity of custodial interrogation. (Paras 3, 4)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that anticipatory bail should be granted when there is no direct evidence of instigation and when the applicant is willing to cooperate with the investigation. (Paras 4, 6)

Result: Application for anticipatory bail allowed with conditions.

ORDER :

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

1.1 By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11203025230799/2023 registered with Junagadh Taluka Police Station, Junagadh for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 307 and 114 of the IPC.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and he is falsely enroped in the offence. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that present applicant is a college going student. During his study, he was residing in hostel and he came into contact with deceased. After sometime, the engagement of the applicant was fixed with another lady. The allegations against the present applicant is that he has blackmailed the deceased. It is submitted that there is no instigation and incitement on the part of the present applicant. There is a delay in lodgment of FIR. Applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation and therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

3. Learned APP has opposed the present application on the ground that the warrant under section 70 Cr.P.C. came to be issued and the present applicant is involved in the offence in connection with one accused, namely Saurav who has developed relationship and tried to blackmail her and his engagement was fixed with another lady. Therefore, the deceased was compelled to commit suicide and she has tried to put an end of her life. It is submitted that investigation is going on and the application of the co-accused namely Saurav has been rejected. Considering the aforesaid fact, he has requested to dismiss the present application. Hence, as custodial interrogation of the applicant is required, he has requested to dismiss the present application.

4. Having heard the learned advocate for the parties and perusing the investigation papers, it is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down in a plethora of decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court on the point. It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are (i) the nature and gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice and (iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested. Though at the stage of granting bail an elaborate examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching the merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be avoided. I have considered the following aspects:

(1) Offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty.

(2) Going through the complaint, it appears that the victim and the present applicant is having affair and due to some reason, some disturbance was created and present applicant has blocked the deceased. Due to this, the disease was unhappy and she tried to cut ven of wrist and also tried to consume the cough syrup. Thereafter the engagement of the present applicant was fixed with another lady and she has put to end her life.

(3) it appears that there was no any direct material or mens area on the part of the present applicant, which suggest the present applicant has incited or instigated the deceased.

(4) Nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the accused.

(5) applicant is ready and willing to join the

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