Gujarat High Court
Bharatbhai @ Munno Hanubhai Boliya vs State Of Gujarat on 11 September, 2017
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
R/CR.MA/20820/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 20820 of 2017
================================================================
BHARATBHAI @ MUNNO HANUBHAI BOLIYA....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR AD SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR P B KHAMBHOLJA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR HK PATEL, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 11/09/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with FIR registered as C.R.No.I-49/2017 with Botad Police Station, Botad for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B), 34 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing Page 1 of 6 HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Tue Sep 12 01:56:59 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/20820/2017 ORDER suitable conditions.
3. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail and has submitted that the conspiracy was hatched at the shop. The incident has also occurred at the very shop of the applicant. The deceased has received 13 injuries and the statement of the co- accused - Kavita, under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to in short as 'the Code') attributes a role to the applicant.
4. Learned Advocate for the original complainant Mr. Pravin Gondaliya submits that the offence has taken place in such a manner where it suggests that the applicant is a master mind. According to learned Advocate for the original complainant, in villages, there are increase in the incidents such as the present case where a honey trap is laid and therefore, enlarging the applicant would send wrong signals in the Society and this application for grant of bail may not be granted.
5. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for a further reasoned order.
Page 2 of 6
HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Tue Sep 12 01:56:59 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/20820/2017 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 investigation has concluded and the chargesheet is filed;
(II) It is submitted by learned Advocate for the applicant that there is no eyewitness and no motive can be attributed to the applicant;
(III) The fatal injury is on account of the head injury which is attributed to the co-accused;
(IV) There is no investigation in the direction of the call details between Kavita and one - Raghubha Vala and; (V) The applicant was admittedly not present when the incident took place.
This Court has 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.
7. Considering the aforesaid submission and having gone through the statement under Section 164 of the Code, the role that is coming out on record is only to the extent of Page 3 of 6 HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Tue Sep 12 01:56:59 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/20820/2017 ORDER laying a honey trap for the deceased. The only evidence is in the nature of statement of the co-accused under Section 164 of the Code, and therefore, the application at this stage deserves consideration.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the First Information Report, 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 C.R. No.I-49/2017 with Botad Police Station, Botad 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;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower Court within a Page 4 of 6 HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Tue Sep 12 01:56:59 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/20820/2017 ORDER 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 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 this Court;
(g) stay out of Botad area for a period of three months, except for attending the trial, marking presence and attending the obsequies ceremony of the grand father of the applicant which is scheduled on 11th and 12th SEPTEMBER, 2017.
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 Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
11. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the Page 5 of 6 HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Tue Sep 12 01:56:59 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/20820/2017 ORDER 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. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
14. Direct Service is permitted today.
Sd/-
(A.Y. KOGJE, J.) Caroline Page 6 of 6 HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Tue Sep 12 01:56:59 IST 2017