Grant of regular bail is appropriate when the investigation is complete (charge-sheet filed), the accused has no criminal antecedents, is a permanent resident, and the evidence suggests alternative causes for the alleged crime, such as family disputes, reducing the necessity of continued incarceration.

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. 11210048260191 of 2026 registered with Umra Police Station, Surat City for the offence punishable under Sections 108 , 308(2) 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 Surat, hence would be available at the time of trial.

ii. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents;

iii.The investigation is over and the charge-sheet has been filed.

iv. The deceased who was married was in relationship with the applicant since 15-17 years, prior to the unfortunate incident.

v. It also appears that the original complainant has stated before the ACP, H Division, Surat City, in her statement dated 09.03.2026 that she had given her statement on 01.02.2026, as regards information note (janvajog) no. 10 of 2026, that there were differences between the family members as regards the preparation of the original complainant’s marriage, and the deceased after being infuriated had committed suicide. However, thereafter, she had stated that, since the applicant had illicit love affair with her father, the applicant had taken disadvantage of the said relationship and had usurped her father’s properties.

vi. One of the prosecution witnesses namely Sharda Rajeshbhai Kabaria, who is the sister of the deceased has also mentioned in her statement before the ACP, H Division, Surat City that, there were differences between her brother and the other family members as regards the preparation of original complainant’s marriage, and the deceased being angry had taken the extreme step.

vii. It also transpires from the statement of prosecution witness Sanjaybhai Vallabhbhai Fagania, who was the deceased’s business partner for 30 years that, the deceased had revealed about his relationship with the applicant to this witness in July. 2025. However, in the light of the fact that, this witness and the deceased were business partners since 30 years, the fact about the deceased being in extra marital relationship with the applicant, could never have gone unnoticed.

viii. The Investigation Officer had also recorded