ORAL ORDER

Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

In the order dated 23.09.2024 in paragraph Nos.2 and 9 name of the police station has wrongly been mentioned as Vithalpur instead of Vithlapur. Therefore, the same be modified and be read as “Vithlapur”.

The rest of the order shall remain unchanged Note for Speaking to Minutes stands disposed of in the above terms.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)

ALI

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO. 18579 of 2024 ==========================================================

BHAVARLAL VIRAMRAM TETARWALA (BISHNOI)

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR HARSHIL C DATTANI(6241) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 23/09/2024

ORAL ORDER

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

2. 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 C.R. No.11192062240035 of 2024 registered with Vithalpur Police Station, Ahmedabad, for the offences punishable under Sections

65(A)(E), 116(b) and 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act.

3. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and he is falsely implicated in the offence. Substantial part of investigation is over and the petitioner is in jail since 03.09.2024. The applicant was not found at the scene of the offence, and nothing has been recovered or discovered from the applicant's possession. He further submits that, considering the

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

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 grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. It is further submitted that the applicant was caught red-handed and he has played active role in the offence in question.

5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. In the present case, the substantial part of investigation is over. The allegation against the present applicant is that he was transporting prohibited muddamal liquor and fled from the spot under the cover of darkness. Except for this, there are no other allegations against him. The offence is not punishable by life imprisonment or death penalty. There has been no recovery or discovery from the applicant, and there is no possibility of proceeding with the trial in the near future. The applicant has no past antecedents, and the offence is triable by a Magistrate.

6. 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

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.

7. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court

Click Here to Read the rest of this document