Gujarat High Court
Balbhadrasinh Virendrasinh Alias ... vs State Of Gujarat on 12 August, 2016
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/CR.MA/12561/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 12561 of 2016
==========================================================
BALBHADRASINH VIRENDRASINH ALIAS TINIYO DARBAR JAGDEVSINH
ZALA....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SHAKEEL A QURESHI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RAKESH R.PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 12/08/2016
ORAL ORDER
By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant-accused prays for bail in connection with the CR No.I-118 of 2003 registered with the Mahidharpura Police Station, Surat city, for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 364, 394, 397, 201, 149 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
The applicant-accused alongwith the other co-accused was arrested on 26th September 2003 in connection with the above referred offence. On 17th December 2009, while on temporary bail and being admitted in the hospital, he absconded in December 2009. He remained absconding for the period between 17th December 2009 and 11th July 2014.
Page 1 of 4
HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sat Aug 13 04:45:36 IST 2016
R/CR.MA/12561/2016 ORDER
It appears that on 12th July 2014, he was arrested and taken into judicial custody. Since then, till this date, he is in judicial custody. During the period he remained absconding, i.e. between December 2009 and July 2014, the other co- accused were tried and acquitted by the trial Court. Since the applicant herein was absconding, the trial came to be separated. The applicant is now sought to be tried all alone.
It appears that against the judgment and order of acquittal recorded by the trial Court so far as the other co- accused are concerned, the State of Gujarat has preferred appeal before the Supreme Court. The original record necessary for the purpose of trying the applicant herein at present is in the Supreme Court. As a result, the trial of the applicant herein is not proceeding further. He remained in custody from 2003 to 2009, i.e. almost for a period of six years, and from 2014 to 2016, i.e. almost for a period of two years. In all, he has remained in custody for almost a period of eight years. All efforts were made on behalf of the State Government to see that the original record from the Supreme Court comes back to the trial Court, but it seems that till this date the record is with the registry of the Supreme Court.
I have tried to examine the matter from different angles. First, the case of the prosecution against the applicant herein, the evidence on record implicating the applicant herein in the alleged crime as well as the judgment and order of acquittal recorded by the trial Court so far as the other co-accused are concerned.
Mr.Patel, the learned APP appearing for the State, Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sat Aug 13 04:45:36 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/12561/2016 ORDER requested that reasons may not be assigned in case if the Court is inclined to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant.
Having heard both the sides and considering the request made by the learned APP, no reasons are being assigned. I am of the view that the discretion can be exercised in favour of the applicant-accused.
This application is allowed and the applicant accused is ordered to be released on bail in connection with the CR No.I- 118 of 2003 registered with the Mahidharpura Police Station, Surat city, on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only) with solvent 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 trial court within a week;
[d] mark presence before the Mahidharpura Police Station every week on every Sunday between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;
[e] regularly attend the trial Court on each of the dates fixed for the recording of the evidence.
[f] not leave the limits of the city of Surat till the conclusion of the trial.
[g] not try, directly or indirectly, to tamper with the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.
Page 3 of 4
HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sat Aug 13 04:45:36 IST 2016
R/CR.MA/12561/2016 ORDER
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.
Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.
Having regard to the fact that the prosecution is of the year 2003, the State shall make all possible endevours to see that the record which is at present in the registry of the Supreme Court stands transferred to the trial Court or atleast a responsible officer shall be deputed to collect the xerox copies of the original record after obtaining necessary permission from the authority concerned in this regard.
Once the record is available with the trial Court, the Court shall see to it that the charge is framed at the earliest and the recording of the evidence also commences.
Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) MOIN Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Sat Aug 13 04:45:36 IST 2016