Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 24361
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
JASTIN @ JEPI MOHANLAL PARERA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 15874 of 2024
Bail is a rule and jail is an exception; personal liberty must be prioritized unless compelling reasons exist to deny bail.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 406, 420, 114 - Prize Chits & Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act - Sections 3, 4, 6 - GPID Act - Section 3 - IT Act - Section 66-D - Application for regular bail in connection with serious financial offences involving substantial amounts collected under false pretenses. (Paras 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8)
(B) Bail Jurisprudence - The principles governing bail applications include the nature of accusations, severity of punishment, potential for witness tampering, and the accused's character and standing. (Paras 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The applicant is accused of defrauding investors of Rs.66,41,569/- through a fraudulent scheme promising high returns. The applicant has been in custody since 29.08.2023, and the investigation is complete. (Paras 3, 4, 6)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the applicant's continued detention would amount to pre-trial conviction, and the principles of bail jurisprudence favor granting bail unless there are compelling reasons against it. (Paras 7, 8)
Issues: The court addressed whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the nature of the allegations and the applicant's circumstances. (Paras 5, 8)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, highlighting the importance of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. (Paras 7, 8)
Result: The application for regular bail is allowed, subject to conditions. (Para 8)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the applicant's case (Para 2) |
| 2. submissions by the applicant's advocate (Para 3) |
| 3. submissions by the respondent-state (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. principles of bail jurisprudence (Para 7) |
| 5. decision on bail application (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
ORAL ORDER
[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.
[2.0] The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being CR No.11215041230001 /2023 registered with Cyber Crime Police Station, Anand for the offences punishable under Sections 406 , 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860, Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Prize Chits & Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) and 3 of the GPID Act and Section 66-D of the IT Act .
[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence and the allegations against the present applicant is that the accused persons is having main ID and he has created chain of the members and floated one scheme and giving temptation of 20% huge return, he has collected the money of Rs..66,41,569/- and accused has received the commission of Rs.33,00,00/- and the said amount is also deposited in his own bank account. Accused is in jail since 29.08.2023. Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. Learned advocate, upon instructions, has submitted that applicant’s father has filed undertaking that his son is ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs.33 lakh within two months from the date of his actual release. It is submitted that applicant is suffering from some ailments. Nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the accused. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
[4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State and has opposed the present application and submitted that the present applicant is involved in the offence and the applicant is facing charge under the GPID Act and he has duped the money from the many witnesses and submitted that if the accused is enlarged on bail, then he will misuse the liberty as he has totally siphoned the amount of Rs.66,41,569/- from the investors and earlier also his bail application came to be dismissed. Hence, there is no change of circumstance. It is submitted that applicant is having similar nature of antecedents. Hence, she requested to dismiss the present application for regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.
[4.1] It is further submitted that on the ground that only with a view to come out from the jail, the undertaking is filed and there is no intention on the part of the applicant, for that if the applicant is playing the fraud from the Court, considering the aforesaid fact, if the applicant released on bail, then, stringent conditions is required to be imposed;
[5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.
[6.0] I have heard the learned advocates
