IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

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

CHARGESHEET) NO. 19881 of 2025

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

HATHIBHAI MAMAIYABHAI GAMARA

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT

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

Appearance:

MR SATYAJIT S SONAGARA(12218) for the Applicant(s) No. 1

MUKUNDKUMAR A THAKKAR(9034) 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 C.R. No.11211060250150 of 2025 registered with Dhajala Police

Station, Surendranagar.

2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Original Complainant and learned

APP for the Respondent – State.

3. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent - State and learned Advocate Mr. Mukundkumar A. Thakkar waives service of notice of Rule on

behalf of the Original Complainant.

4. Learned Advocate 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.

5. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that the present applicant had given an axe blow on the head of the victim and because of the same, the victim had sustained severe injuries and had also suffered hemorrhage. The victim has also lost his memory because of the assault. 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.

6. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Original Complainant has also opposed the application contending that, even today, the condition of the victim is not good and he is still bed ridden. The victim has also lost his memory because of the assault. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present application.

7. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. The investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. As per case prosecution, the applicant is alleged to have assaulted the victim with an axe and had given two blows on the head of the victim and because of the same, the victim had sustained severe injuries and had also suffered hemorrhage. The victim is also said to have lost his memory because of the assault. Having regard to these aspects, the Application deserves consideration.

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 01.07.2025.

(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.

8. 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 deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands allowed. This Court has also gone through the FIR and police papers and also the earl