Bail may be granted when there is significant delay in the trial and the accused has undergone prolonged incarceration, provided the risks of fleeing or tampering with evidence are mitigated.

ORDER

1. The applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11210045242108 of 2024 registered with Pandesara Police Station, District:Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 498(A), 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Heard learned advocate appearing for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent – State.

2.1 Rule. Learned PP waives service of Rule on behalf of the Respondent State.

3. 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.

4. Per contra, the application is opposed by learned APP for the respondent contending that the present applicant happens to be husband of the deceased. The allegations levelled against the applicant in the FIR are very clear that he had subjected the deceased to physical and mental torture and therefore she had committed suicide. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present application.

5. This Court has considered the submissions canvassed by learned advocates for the parties and has also perused the material placed on record. Earlier the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Application No.4036 of 2025 which was allowed to be withdrawn by this court vide order dated 17.3.2025. Thereafter, the present successive application has been filed by the applicant. The present applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 5.6.2024 and since then the applicant is in custody. Thus, the applicant had undergone incarceration for a period of almost two years.

6. This court vide order dated 23.4.2026 had asked learned Trial Court to submit its report as regards the status of trial. Accordingly, learned trial court has submitted its report as regards the status of trial which indicates that till date only three witnesses have been examined. Considering the same, the application deserves consideration.

7. This court has 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 judicial custody.

(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 earlier order passed by the learned Sessions Court where the learned Sessions Judge has disallowed the bail Application at initial stage. The Applicant Accused is o