🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Virsingbhai Singabhai Vasava Vs State Of Gujarat

Case No: R/Criminal Misc.Application No. 2112 Of 2024 (For Regular Bail - Before Chargesheet)

Date of Decision: Feb. 5, 2024

Acts Referred: Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439#Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 — Section 65(a), 65(3)

Hon'ble Judges: Divyesh A. Joshi, J

Bench: Single Bench

Advocate: Hiren M Modi, Dhawan Jayswal

Final Decision: Allowed

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

Judgement

Divyesh A. Joshi, J

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for respondent â€" State of Gujarat.

2. 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.11823004231468/2023 registered with the Dediyapada Police Station, Narmada for the offence punishable under Sections 65(a) and 65(3) of the

Prohibition Act.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the so-called incident has taken place on 17.12.2023, for which, the FIR has been lodged on the

very same day i.e. on 17.12.2023 and the applicant has been arrested in connection with the same on 16.01.2024 and since then, he is in judicial

custody. Learned advocate submitted that the present application is preferred before submission of the chargesheet, however, almost investigation is

completed. Learned advocate submitted that in fact, the applicant was not found at the place of occurrence along with contraband articles and there is

no past antecedent reported against the present application. It is, therefore, urged that considering the nature of the offence and penal provisions

mentioned in the statute, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

4. 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.

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

6. 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.

7. It is found out from the record that the present application is preferred before submission of the chargesheet, however, almost investigation is

concluded and the applicant is in jail since 16.01.2024. I have considered the role attributed to the present applicant â€" accused at the time of

commission of crime and the penal provisions mentioned under the statute. Therefore considering the above factual aspects, the present application

deserves to be allowed.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. 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.11823004231468/2023 registered with the Dediyapada Police Station, Narmada 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;

11. 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.

12. 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.

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