IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 21457 of 2025 ==========================================================

MUKESHBHAI KALYANBHAI MAKVANA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR HRIDAY BUCH with MR KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 10/11/2025

ORAL ORDER

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

State.

[2.0] The present successive application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11203024240051 of 2024 registered with ‘B’ Division Police Station, District Junagadh for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 331 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) and section 135 of the Gujarat Police 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 he has been behind the bars since 05.02.2024. Further, the earlier application being Criminal Misc. Application No.11061/2024 came to be withdrawn vide order dated 30.09.2024 with liberty to file a fresh application if the trial does not commence within reasonable time. It is submitted that though specific direction to expedite the trial was given, there is no progress in the trial and therefore, present application is filed on the ground of delay in trial.

[4.0] Heard learned advocate appearing for the respective parties.

[5.0] Present successive application is filed on the ground of delay in trial and in peculiar facts of the case on hand, a report was called for from the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh pursuant to which a detailed report dated 30.10.2025 has been filed. Perusal of the report clearly reveals that prosecution is not interested or unable to expedite the trial and considering the provisions of section 346 of the BNSS as well as seriousness of offence as it involves case of custodial torture and violence against police officers as also considering the fact that the prosecuting agency neither paid any heed to the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge for expeditious disposal of trial nor the order issuing direction passed by this Court in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Mir Usman @ Ara @ Mir Usman Ali rendered in Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No.969/2025 dated 22.09.2025, prosecution has failed to produce the scheduled list of witnesses. As such 67 witnesses are cited in the charge-sheet and prosecution has examined only 11 witnesses and subsequent direction was given on 30.09.2024 in CR.MA No.11061/2024, though the trial has remained at snail’s pace and hence, specific order was passed on 04.11.2025 by this Court and through Director of Prosecution, report was called for and directed to do the needful and to offer remarks and to ensure about the compliance of direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mir Usman (Supra)

[5.1] Pursuant to the said direction, today the learned APP has submitted the communication dated 08.11.2025 of Deputy Director, Directorate of Prosecution, addressed to the learned Public Prosecutor, Gujarat High Court, where it is stated that the learned APP who is in charge of the Sessions Case before the Sessions Court, Junagadh and said report is considered and treated as progress report of sessions case. It is sorry state of affair that even the highest authority which is in the helm of prosecution of State has failed to consider the dictum of Hon’ble Supreme Court and mandatory provisions of the BNSS and has neither paid any heed for expeditious trial of the sessions case nor they have any control over the office of t