Gujarat High Court
Lilavantiben @ Lilaba Vijay Chauhan vs State Of Gujarat on 8 May, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7885/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 7885 of 2024
(FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET)
=======================================================
LILAVANTIBEN @ LILABA VIJAY CHAUHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=======================================================
Appearance:
MS ANUSHREE M SONI(11431) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=======================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 08/05/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for respondent - 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.11205013220607/2022 registered with the Mankuva Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 8(C), 22(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the so-called incident has taken place for the period between 16.12.2022 to 17.12.2022, for which, the FIR has been lodged on 17.12.2022 and the applicant has been arrested in connection with the same on 17.12.2022 and since then, he is in judicial custody. Learned advocate submitted that now the investigation is completed and after Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed May 08 20:48:42 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7885/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2024 undefined submission of the chargesheet, the present application is preferred. Learned advocate submitted that FIR is lodged against total 4 accused, wherein the applicant is shown as accused no.2. Learned advocate submitted that it is the specific case of the prosecution that on the basis of secret information received, the members of the raiding party have reached at particular place, where search was carried out and during search, 28.50 Kgs. contraband articles were recovered from the possession of the applicant, which can be said to be intermediate quantity and, hence, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not apply. Learned advocate submitted that there is no antecedent reported against the applicant. It is, therefore, urged that considering the nature of the offence, 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. Learned APP submitted that on the strength of the information received, raid was carried out and total 49.4 Kgs. contraband articles were recovered from the accused persons, which can be said to be commercial quantity and, hence rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would come into play. Learned advocate submitted that during the course of Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed May 08 20:48:42 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7885/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2024 undefined investigation, the statements of the owners of the premises were recorded, wherein they have stated in a very categorical terms that the accused persons are involved in such activities. It is, therefore, urged that considering above factual aspects, 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. 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 17.12.2022. It is found out from the record that from the possession of the applicant, 28.5 Kgs. contraband articles were recovered, which is intermediate quantity and, hence rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not come into play. I have considered the role attributed to the present applicant at the time of commission of crime and found that no antecedent is reported against the applicant. Therefore considering the above factual aspects, the present application deserves to be allowed.
7. This Court has also taken into consideration the Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed May 08 20:48:42 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7885/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2024 undefined 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.11205013220607/2022 registered with the Mankuva Police Station 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 concerned court within a week;
[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the concerned court;
Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed May 08 20:48:42 IST 2024NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7885/2024 ORDER DATED: 08/05/2024 undefined [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;
10. 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.
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.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.) Gautam Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed May 08 20:48:42 IST 2024