Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Naresh @ Polio Narshibhai Sarvaiya vs State Of Gujarat on 5 January, 2021

Author: A.Y. Kogje

Bench: A.Y. Kogje

        R/CR.MA/14469/2020                                          ORDER




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

          R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 14469 of 2020

==========================================================
                NARESH @ POLIO NARSHIBHAI SARVAIYA
                              Versus
                        STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR K S CHANDRANI(6674) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR H K PATEL, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PRATIK Y JASANI for the Respondent(s).No.
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

                               Date : 05/01/2021

                                   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.I­11208050200020 with A Division Police Station, Rajkot for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 120(B) and 403 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 suitable conditions.

3. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent­State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature Page 1 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 11 17:41:27 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/14469/2020 ORDER and gravity of the offence.

4. Mr.Pratik Jasani, learned advocate for the original complainant opposes the grant of application on the ground that deceased had consumed liquor lastly at the residence of the applicant is sufficient to establish conspiracy. He draws attention of this Court to demonstration of panchnama, wherein version of wife of the applicant is also reflected.

5. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for a 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 14.01.2020 for the offence which took place on 24.08.2019. II) The applicant is in custody since 05.03.2020.

III) Investigation is concluded and charge­sheet is filed.

IV) Submissions of learned advocate for the learned advocate for the applicant that the FIR has been delayed by 5(five) months and the Page 2 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 11 17:41:27 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/14469/2020 ORDER motive is attributed only to accused no.1 as he was the brother in law of the deceased and son in law of the complainant, who desire inherited property of the complainant.

V) Submissions of learned advocate for the applicant that the applicant is arraigned as accused as a part of conspiracy, however, even after the charge­sheet, no evidence directly connecting the applicant prima­facie to establish the conspiracy except the fact that the deceased had consumed liquor in company with the present applicant and other accused at his residence.

VI) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor under the instructions of the Investigating Officer is unable to bring on record any special circumstances against the applicant.

7. 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.

Page 3 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 11 17:41:27 IST 2022

R/CR.MA/14469/2020 ORDER

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.I­11208050200020 with A Division Police Station, Rajkot 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 week;

(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior Page 4 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 11 17:41:27 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/14469/2020 ORDER 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;

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 concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.

Page 5 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 11 17:41:27 IST 2022

          R/CR.MA/14469/2020                                          ORDER




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. Direct Service is permitted.

(A.Y. KOGJE, J) GIRISH K PARMAR Page 6 of 6 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 11 17:41:27 IST 2022