ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.

2. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with C.R. No. 11200048240148 of 2024 registered with the Vapi Town Police Station, District Valsad for the offence punishable under Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Mirza appearing on behalf of the applicant has submitted that the so called incident has occurred on 19.11.2021 and FIR was registered on 17.01.2024 and in connection with the same, the applicant was arrested on 18.01.2024 and since then, she is in judicial custody. Learned advocate further submits that the FIR was registered against three accused persons. The applicant is mother-in-law. It is further submitted that the allegations levelled against the present applicant are vague and general in nature. It is also submitted that brother-in-law whose role is identical has already enlarged on bail by this Court. Learned advocate submits that considering the above stated factual aspect as well as role attributed to the present applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.

4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present bail application. It is submitted that the role of the present applicant is clearly spelt out from the body of the FIR. He further submitted that considering the role attributed by the present applicant, the present application may not be considered.

5. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.

6. I have perused the police papers as well as documents produced by the applicant along with the memo of the application. It is found out from the record that the applicant is jail since 18.01.2024. The applicant is lady accused. Brother-in- law whose role is identical has already enlarged on bail by this Court. Considering the above stated factual aspect and considering the role attributed by the present applicant at the time of commission offence, I am inclined to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant.

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 as well as in case of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022)10 SCC 51.

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 and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No. 11200048240148 of 2024 registered with the Vapi Town Police Station, District Valsad, on executing a personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that she shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; [b] not act in a manner injuries to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

[e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station on alternate Monday of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.;

[f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating OfÏcer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court;

10. The authorities will release the applicant only if she is not required in connection with any other of