IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER

CHARGESHEET) NO. 17062 of 2025

==========================================================

DASHRATHSINH FATESINH RATHOD

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR BM MANGUKIYA(437) for the Applicant(s) No. 1

MS BELA A PRAJAPATI(1946) for the Applicant(s) No. 1

MR. ANANTANAND J SINGH(10046) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

MS AKANKSHA U TIWARI(11499) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

PARTH Y RAVAL(9535) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

MS. DIVYANGNA JHALA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY

Date : 14/10/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on regular bail in connection with FIR being CR. No.11205048250167 of 2025

registered with Kodai Police Station, Kachchh – West, Bhuj.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent – State, learned Advocate Mr. Parth Raval for the respondent –

original complainant waives service of notice.

3. Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has good reputation in the society and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in Jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions

that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application contending that the present applicant happens to be the husband of the deceased. There is a clear allegations against the applicant in the FIR that he used to subject the deceased to physical and mental torture and because of the same, she has committed suicide. Learned APP has, therefore, submitted that looking to the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.

5. Learned Advocate Mr. Parth Raval for the respondent – original complainant submitted that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and the complainant is having no objection if the applicant is ordered to be enlarged on bail. He, therefore, submitted to pass an appropriate order.

6. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. In the present offence, the investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. The marriage span between the applicant and the deceased more more than 15 years. It is alleged against the applicant that he used to subject the deceased to physical and mental torture and because of which, the deceased has committed suicide. The matter has been amicably settled between the parties and the complainant has no objection if the applicant is ordered to be enlarged on bail. Having regard to these aspects, the present application deserves consideration, hence the present application is hereby allowed. 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 since 30.05.2025.

(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. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perusing the record produced in this case as well as taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of accusation, availability of the applicant accused at the time of Trial etc. and the role attributed to the present applicant accused, the present application deser