Gujarat High Court
Rasid Khalidbhai Saiyed vs State Of Gujarat on 3 September, 2020
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
R/CR.MA/241/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 241 of 2020
================================================================
RASID KHALIDBHAI SAIYED
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. J.M.PANCHAL, ADVOCATE with MR. SOEB R. BHOHARIA(2205) for
the Applicant(s) No. 1
VALIMOHAMMED PATHAN(6383) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. ALAK A PANDYA(7164) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR.H.K.PATEL, APP, (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 03/09/2020
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with FIR being I-CR No.108 of 2019 registered with Gayakwad Haveli Police Station, Ahmedabad City for offence under Sections 302, 324, 294(b) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.
2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
3. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. He submitted that it is a case of 11 eye witnesses of which one of the eye witnesses Sufiya who has received knife injury Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 04 02:22:17 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/241/2020 ORDER and he is an injured witness and in his statement he has involved the present applicant. He submitted that considering the allegations made in the FIR, it is not a case where the sudden provocation has resulted in the incident.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Alak Pandya appearing for the original complainant submits that case of the co-accused Sohel Tyrewala, has been challenged by the complainant side before the Apex Court, wherein notice has also been issued and hence, till such decision is taken by the Apex Court, the applicant may not be enlarged on regular bail.
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. Following aspects are considered:-
I. The FIR is registered on 22.09.2019 for the offence which is alleged to have taken place on 22.09.2019.
II. The applicant is in jail since 22.09.2019. III. The investigation is concluded and charge-sheet is filed.
IV. The submission of learned advocate for the applicant is that the accused persons had no axe to grind against the deceased and were having disputes with Salman and Tausif. It was only thereafter, when the deceased intervened and the incident took place and therefore, it cannot be Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 04 02:22:17 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/241/2020 ORDER said that there was a premeditated plan to commit murder of the deceased.
V. The submission of learned advocate for the applicant is that from the investigation case papers, the only allegation against the applicant is to have caught hold of the deceased while the co- accused inflicted injury and two other persons who are attributed with the same role of catching hold of the deceased have been enlarged on bail. VI. Learned advocate draws attention of this Court to order of Sohel Tyrewala dated 12.06.2020 in Criminal Misc. Application No.2994 of 2020 another decision wherein the co-accused Parvez has been released on regular bail by the Sessions Court.
VII. Considering the submission of learned advocate for the applicant that though the applicant was apprehended on the very day of the FIR and the clothes of the applicant have been seized there is no sign of any blood stains and therefore, active involvement is ruled out. It is submitted that there is no recovery or discovery.
VIII. Considering the fact that the co-accused, who are identically situated, have been enlarged by this Court as well as by the Sessions Court.
V. Learned APP under instructions of IO is unable to bring on record any special circumstances against the applicant.
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. Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 04 02:22:17 IST 2020
R/CR.MA/241/2020 ORDER
8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR I-CR No.108 of 2019 registered with Gayakwad Haveli Police Station, Ahmedabad City, on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 injurious to the interest of the prosecution & shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week;
(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Trial Court concerned;
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(f) furnish the present address of his 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 Trial Court;
Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 04 02:22:17 IST 2020
R/CR.MA/241/2020 ORDER
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 Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) CAROLINE/Siddharth Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 04 02:22:17 IST 2020