In a recent judgement by the Gujarat High Court, the rejection of a bail application was upheld, despite the ground of settlement being put forth. The Court deliberated on the serious allegations in the case, emphasizing the importance of considering all factors before granting bail. Stay tuned for more details on this significant legal development!
Facts
- Application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with FIR C.R. No.11208057230026/2023
- Offences include Sections 354A, 354C, 376, 376D, 498A, 506(2), 508, 509, 34 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 66(e) and 67(a) of the Information Technology Act
- Previous bail application (Criminal Misc. Application No.20522/2023) rejected on 08.12.2023
- Current application filed after completion of investigation and submission of chargesheet
Arguments
- Learned APP for the State has opposed the grant of regular bail due to the nature and gravity of the offence.
- The present bail application is successive after the rejection of an earlier bail application, with the exception of the ground of settlement.
- The original complainant has sworn an affidavit stating that the issue is cleared and settled between the applicant and herself, and she has no objection to bail being granted.
- Citing the case of Kapil Gupta Vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr, where bail was granted based on settlement, the advocate argues for bail in the present case.
- Urging the court to consider granting bail with suitable conditions despite the serious allegations in the FIR against the accused.
Analysis
- The Court rejected the bail application after considering the reasoning given by the concerned court and the affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer (IO).
- There have been no changed circumstances since the previous rejection of the bail application, except for the ground of settlement.
- A quashing petition was filed on the ground of settlement, but both the Coordinate Bench of the Court and the present Court were not inclined to entertain it due to the serious allegations against the accused persons.
- This is the third application filed by the applicants, with the previous two being withdrawn before chargesheet submission and rejected after chargesheet submission.
- The Court considered the serious allegations leveled against the applicant and their role in the case.
- Detailed discussion of evidence and the merits of the case is deemed unnecessary at this juncture, as there are no changed circumstances warranting a different decision in favor of the applicant.
- The Court referred to a decision relied upon by the advocate for the applicant.
- Discretionary relief is being considered in the case
- The decisions referred to by the applicant’s advocate are not applicable to the current situation
- The Coordinate Bench of the Court is not willing to entertain the application
Decision
- There cannot be any dispute regarding the ratio laid down in the judgment.
- Previous FIRs were quashed based on settlement, but the current bail application is being considered.
- No changed circumstances have been presented since the rejection of the earlier bail application.
- The bail application is rejected, and the trial court is directed to proceed with the trial promptly.
- The trial court should not be influenced by the observations made in the current order.
Case Title: ANJANABEN W/O BHAVINBHAI DEVSHANKERBHAI MODHA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.MA/8314/2024
