Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 5212
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
M. R. MENGDEY, J
TEJALBEN KALPESHKUMAR SHYAMRAV GURAV – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 12123 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: URVESH M PRAJAPATI
For the Respondents: MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP
The court granted bail considering the nature of allegations, prior involvement of co-accused, and the applicant's adherence to required conditions.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Application for regular bail - This application seeks regular bail in connection with a serious offence involving extortion through objectionable photographs. The court considers that prior involvement of co-accused and the nature of allegations justify bail. (Paras 6 and 5)
(B) Factors for Bail - The court assesses prima facie case, the likelihood of flight, and risks of witness tampering - The applicant is found ready to adhere to requirements for bail approval and non-interference with trial proceedings. (Paras 6 and 7)
Facts of the case:
The application is for regular bail after chargesheet in a case of alleged extortion involving the capturing of objectionable photographs of the first informant. The applicant is alleged to have attempted extortion based on those photographs.
Findings of Court:
The court finds the applicant suitable for bail subject to numerous specified conditions ensuring compliance and oversight.
Issues: Primarily, whether the allegations constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail and the conditions necessary for granting bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court exercises discretion for bail based on factors highlighting the suitability of the applicant for release while ensuring compliance with legal protocols and safeguarding trial integrity.
Result: The application for bail is allowed subject to specified conditions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail application process and established criteria. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding the seriousness of the offence and bail conditions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observations on bail suitability based on submitted evidence. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. conditions imposed for bail and their legal implications. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. overall conclusion to grant bail under specified conditions. (Para 9 , 10) |
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.
2. This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No.11206044250272 of 2025 registered with ‘A’
Division Police Station, District Mahesana.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that considering the nature of offence and role attributed to the applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
4. The learned APP appearing for the respondent State has vehemently submitted that the applicant had actively involved in the present offence as the applicant had tried to extort money from the first informant and some objectionable photograph of the first informant had also captured by the present applicant. Learned APP has, therefore, submitted that the offence is serious in nature and looking to the facts as well as the allegations levelled against the applicant, no discretion is required to be exercised.
5. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. Investigation is over and Charge-sheet has already been filed. As per the case of prosecution, the first informant was called at some place where some objectionable photograph were captured by the present applicant and on the basis of those photograph, the applicant had made an attempt to extort money. The other co-accused has been considered for grant of bail. Having regard to the same, the present application deserves to be allowed.
6. This court has also considered the following aspects:
(a) As per catena of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, there are mainly 3 factors which are required to be considered by this court i.e. prima facie case, availability of Applicant accused at the time of trial and tampering and hampering with the witnesses by the accused.
(b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away.
(c) That the Applicant is in custody.
(d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I. Reported in (2012)
1 SCC 40.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made in the FIR and without discussing the evidence in details as well as without going into details, prima-facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion to enlarge the applicant on bail. Hence, the application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR, on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that;
(a) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.
(b) shall maintain law and order and not to indulge in any criminal activities.
(c) shall furnish the documentary proof of complete, correct and present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and to the Trial Court at the time of executing the bond and shall not change residence without prior permission of the trial Court.
(d) shall provide contact numbers as well as the contact numbers of the sureties before the Trial Court. In case of change in such numbers inform in writing immediately to the trial Court.
(e) shall file an affidavit stating immovable properties whethe
