🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Ratilal Dahyabhai Salat Vs State Of Gujarat

Case No: R/Criminal Misc.Application No. 14377 Of 2023 (For Regular Bail - After Chargesheet)

Date of Decision: Jan. 25, 2024

Acts Referred: Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439#Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 114, 302, 323, 452

Hon'ble Judges: Divyesh A. Joshi, J

Bench: Single Bench

Advocate: Jaysinh R Kag, Vicky B Mehta, Shruti Pathak

Final Decision: Allowed

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

Divyesh A. Joshi, J

1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.

No.11204026230138/2023 registered with the Kapadwanj Town Police Station, Kheda for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 323, 452 and

114 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the so-called incident has taken place on 06.04.2023, for which, the FIR has been lodged on the

very next day i.e. on 07.04.2023 and the applicant has been arrested in connection with the same on 09.04.2023 and since then, he is in judicial

custody. Learned advocate submitted that now the investigation is completed and after submission of the chargesheet, the present application is

preferred. Learned advocate submitted that name and specific role is mentioned in the FIR. Learned advocate submitted that due to some dispute,

scuffle took place between the complainant and the present applicant â€" accused and at that time, the present applicant has given fist blow on the

chest of the deceased and, thereafter, other co-accused have come there and started giving kick and fist blows to the deceased and during that

commotion, persons from surrounding area assembled there and, hence, the accused fled away from the said place. Learned advocate submitted that

after the said incident, the injured was taken to hospital, where he was given treatment, however after two days, the injured succumbed to the injuries.

Learned advocate has referred to Postmortem Report produced on record and submitted that from the postmortem report, it is found out that the

injured has not sustained any serious or grievous injuries and prima facie it seems that due to blows, rib was broken, however at the time of

commission of crime, the present applicant has not used any knife of weapon and the incident has occurred in a spur of moment. Learned advocate,

therefore, urged that considering the nature of the offence and the role attributed to him, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing

suitable conditions.

3. Learned APP for the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. It is submitted that the

role of the present applicant is clearly spelt out from the papers of the chargesheet and, hence, the present application may not be entertained.

4. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.

5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers of the investigation and considered the

allegations levelled against the applicant and the role played by the applicant. It is found out from the record that the present application is preferred

after submission of the chargesheet and now the investigation is completed and the applicant is in jail since 09.04.2023. I have considered the role

attributed to the present applicant coupled with the medical papers including the postmortem report. It is an admitted position of fact that the applicant

has not used any weapon at the time of commission of crime. Therefore considering the above factual aspects, the present application deserves to be

allowed.

6. This Court has also 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 as well as in case of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022) 10

SCC 51.

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, 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 regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.

No.11204026230138/2023 registered with the Kapadwanj Town Police Station, Kheda on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen

Thousand only) with one 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 injuries to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

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

[e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station on alternate Monday of every English calendar month for a period of six months between

11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;

[f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change

the residence without prior permission of this Court;

9. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the

above conditions is committed, the concerned Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail

bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax

any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.

10. At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while

enlarging the applicant on bail.

11. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.