IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 14966 of 2024 ==========================================================

SUJAL S/O BABUBHAI SHANKARBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR SANJAY PRAJAPATI(3227) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS ASMITA PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 03/10/2024

ORAL ORDER

[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

[2.0] The present application is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11216026240003 of 2024 registered with Cyber Crime Police Station, Gandhinagar, for the o punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed. 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 has opposed the present application by contending that, the other accused are out of reach and hence, she requested to dismiss the present application for regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

[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 appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. In present case, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Following aspects have been considered:

(1) Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed;

(2) Allegations levelled in the FIR that the accused have messaged the complainant for part time job on mobile and added him in telegram group and in the pretext of giving review on link given to them, won over the confidence of the complainant and then extorted and compelled to deposit money of Rs.11.39 lacs in different bank accounts and out of the same, Rs.2 lacs was deposited in the account of the present applicant.

(3) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life sentence or death penalty;

(4) Applicant is behind bar since 01.03.2024;

(5) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;

(6) offence is punishable upto 7 years’

(7) offence is triable by the JMFC Court;

(8) Co-accused are absconding is not a ground to refuse the bail.

[7.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused