Simiben @ Manishaben @ Manjuben W/O Bhaveshbhai @ Bhaylabhai Nayak vs State Of Gujarat

 Dr. Ashokkumar C. Joshi, J

Applicant â€" Simiben @ Manishaben @ Manjuben W/o. Bhaveshbhai @ Bhaylabhai Nayak has filed this application under Section 439 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘the Code’) for enlarging her on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.

11202056210214 of 2021 registered with Kalawad (Rural) Police Station, District: Jamnagar for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 302,

504 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (herein after referred to as ‘the IPC’) and Section 135(1) of the G. P. Act.

Heard learned advocate Mr. Premal Rachh for the applicant and learned APP Ms. C. M. Shah for the respondent - State.

Submission of the Parties:

Learned advocate for the applicant - accused submitted that the applicant is a innocent lady and has no direct role in the commission of crime. It is

submitted that the applicant is charged with the aforesaid offences, however, the ingredients of the said offences are not satisfied.

3.1 The learned advocate for the applicant further submitted that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed and a perusal of the charge-sheet

papers reveals no prima facie case against the present applicant. Further, the applicant has no antecedents. Moreover, it is submitted that the applicant

has four minor daughters, out of whom, one is sent to the Vikas Gruh, whereas, other three minor daughters are with the applicant, in the jail only.

3.2 The learned advocate for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant has roots in the society and no useful purpose would be served by

keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. He also submitted that the applicant - accused is not likely to flee away. 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.

Per contra, learned APP has vehemently opposed the present application for grant of regular bail. She submitted that from the charge sheet papers,

prima facie case is made out against the present applicant. It is submitted that the applicant is charged with the serious offence punishable under

Section 302 IPC etc., and accordingly, looking to the nature and gravity of the offence, it is requested that this Court may not exercise the discretion in

favour of the applicant.

Merits of the Case:

This court has considered the following aspects:

(a) in the present case it is an admitted fact that the applicant - accused has come for this application after the charge sheet is filed;

(b) the applicant is a widow and as per the learned advocate for the applicant, her three minor daughters are also there with the applicant in jail;

(c) the applicant stated to have no antecedents;

(d) as per catena of decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court, there are mainly three factors which are required to be considered by the court i.e. prima

facie case, availability of applicant - accused at the time of trial and tampering and hampering with the evidence by the accused;

(e) the learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is not likely to flee away;

(f) the applicant is in custody since 12.04.2021;

(g) law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I., (2012) 1 SCC 40, wherein it is held that bail is a rule and jail is

an exception and there should not be pretrial punishment;

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 â€" accused and the fact that the applicant has no antecedents vis-a-vis the fact that three minor daughters of the applicant are also there

with her in jail, the present application deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in

connection with above-referred FIR, on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety of the like

amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions that the applicant shall:

(a) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from

disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence;

(b) maintain law and order and not to indulge in any criminal activities;

(c) furnish the documentary proof of complete, correct and present address of her residence to the Investigating Officer and to the trial Court at the

time of executing the bond and shall not change her residence without prior permission of the trial Court;

(d) provide her contact numbers as well as the contact numbers of the sureties before the trial Court. In case of change in such numbers inform in

writing immediately to the trial Court;

(e) file an affidavit stating her immovable properties whether self acquired or ancestral with description, location and present value of such properties

before the trial Court, if any;

(f) not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.

(g) surrender passport, if any, to the trial Court within a week. If she does not possess passport, she shall file an Affidavit to that effect;

(h) shall maintain all the rules and regulations framed by the Corporation regarding contemporary status of corona virus/Covid-19, State Government

or by any competent authority, including social distancing.

Bail bond to be executed before the trial Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It would be open for the trial Court concerned to give time to

furnish the solvency certificate if prayed for.

If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the trial Court concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action according to

law. The authorities will release the applicant forthwith only if she is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being.

At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.

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