In a recent judgment by the Gujarat High Court, bail has been granted in connection with FIR C.R.No. 11198006240458 of 2024. The court carefully considered the nature of allegations and the role of the accused in its decision. Learn about the key aspects of the judgment and the factors influencing the granting of bail.
Facts
- The applicant has filed a plea under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR C.R.No. 11198006240458 of 2024 with Ghogha Road Police Station, Bhavnagar.
- The applicant, a female, seeks anticipatory bail for alleged offences under Sections 376(1), 2(n) and 114 of IPC.
- The advocate representing the applicant argues that due to the nature of allegations and the applicant’s role, she should be granted anticipatory bail with suitable conditions.
Arguments
- Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed anticipatory bail based on nature and gravity of offence.
- Court heard arguments from both parties and reviewed investigation papers.
Analysis
- Learned counsel for the parties heard, record of the case perused.
- Facts, nature of allegations, role of accused taken into consideration.
- Exercise of discretion in favor of the applicant.
- Basic principles for granting bail as per Hon’ble Supreme Court to be followed.
- The present application is allowed, directing that the applicant be released on bail upon arrest in connection with the FIR registered with Ghogha Road Police Station, Bhavnagar.
- Conditions for bail include cooperating with the investigation, making oneself available for interrogation, presenting at the Police Station on a specified date, refraining from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, providing current address to authorities, surrendering passport if applicable, and not leaving the country without court approval.
- Any breach of bail conditions empowers the concerned Judge to take appropriate action.
- The Court has considered relevant principles from the case of Prasanta Kumar Sarkar Vs. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., emphasizing on exercising discretion judiciously and strictly based on various factors like the nature of the accusation, gravity of the offense, likelihood of absconding, and potential influence on witnesses.
- No allegations of Section 376 have been made against the applicant, with her role being limited to being aware of the accused’s relationship with the complainant.
- The Court also took into account the affidavit of the Investigating Officer presented before the Trial Court.
- Overall, the Court’s discretion in favor of the applicant was guided by the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Decision
- The Court has listed specific conditions that the concerned Court can modify as per the law
- During the trial, the Trial Court should not be swayed by the initial observations made by this Court during granting bail
- Direct service is allowed in this case
Case Title: NIRUBEN DINKARBHAI GAVALI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.MA/9158/2024
