ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. 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. 11211050250789 of 2025 registered with Thangadh Police Station, Surendranagar, for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 317(2) and 317(4) of the BNS, 2023.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that, considering the role attributed to the applicant, and nature of the allegation levelled, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. It is further submitted that, since the charge-sheet is filed, further incarceration of the applicant will not benefit the Investigation Officer in any manner. 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. As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State has vehemently objected to the grant of regular bail. Learned APP has submitted that looking to the nature of offence and the role attributed to the present applicant as coming out from the charge-sheet, this Court may not exercise discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.

6. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:-

i. The applicant is a permanent resident of District:Surendranagar, hence, would be available at the time of trial.

ii. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedent.

iii.Investigation being over, charge-sheet has been filed.

iv.As per the prosecution case, the applicant had given his bank account with HDFC Bank to co-accused Vishal Dharamshibhai Parmar, wherein, an amount of Rs.9,80,000/- towards cyber fraud was deposited and thereafter the said amount was transferred by way of cheque/G-pay/RTGS to co-accused Brijeshbhai Shailesh Patni.

v. Neither from the charge-sheet nor from the affidavit of the I.O., it appears that the applicant has received any commission or any other monetary consideration from the co-accused for giving his said bank account on rent for the deposit of cyber fraud amount.

vi.The apprehension of the learned APP as regards the applicant if granted bail, he would once again indulge in such or similar offense, can be put to rest by imposing stringent conditions.

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11211050250789 of 2025 registered with Thangadh Police Station, Surendranagar, on executing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the trial court within a week, and if he does not possess a passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect;

[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Court concerned;

[e] furnish the present address of his residence to th