A significant legal development unfolded in the case of grant of regular bail by the Gujarat High Court in a matter involving the POCSO Act. The judgment, which pertains to a case filed under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(J)(N) of the IPC and Sections 3(A), 4 and 12 of the POCSO Act, showcases the Court’s careful evaluation of the chargesheet and the role of the applicant. The case, which has seen the applicant in judicial custody since June, has now taken a new turn with the Court’s decision. Stay updated with the latest details from this noteworthy legal proceeding!
Facts
- The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail.
- The FIR was registered with the Chuda Police Station, Surendranagar for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(J)(N) of the IPC and Sections 3(A), 4 and 12 of the POCSO Act.
- The incident took place on 29.04.2023, with the FIR filed on 11.05.2023 and the applicant was arrested on 06.06.2023 and has been in judicial custody since.
- The investigation is completed and chargesheet has been submitted, leading to the filing of the present bail application.
Arguments
- Learned advocate for the applicant urged for regular bail considering the nature of the offence and other factual aspects.
- Application filed after victim’s evidence recorded where she did not support prosecution and turned hostile.
- Victim was aged about 17 years and 6 months at the time of the crime.
- The learned advocates for the respondent did not request for a detailed order.
- The allegations against the respondent and their role in the investigation have been carefully evaluated from the record.
- Therefore, based on the chargesheet and the role described, the application made by the respondent may not be considered.
- The applicant’s involvement is clearly outlined in the chargesheet.
Analysis
- The applicant has not supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile.
- Considering the role attributed to the applicant at the time of the commission of the crime.
- The present application is filed after the submission of the chargesheet and completion of the investigation.
- The applicant has been in jail since 06.06.2023.
- The evidence of the victim has already been recorded.
- The Court considered the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation
- Reference was also made to the case of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.
- The Court, without delving into the evidence in detail, found it to be a fit case to grant the applicant regular bail
- The nature of the allegations in the FIR was taken into consideration for granting bail
Decision
- The trial Court shall not be influenced by observations made by the Court during bail hearing.
- The rule for bail is granted to the extent mentioned.
- Direct service is allowed as per the order.
- The Sessions Judge has the authority to take action if any conditions are breached.
- The applicant is granted bail on a personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with a surety of the same amount.
- Multiple conditions are imposed on the applicant, including not misusing liberty, not harming prosecution’s interests, surrendering passport, not leaving Gujarat without permission, and marking presence at the Police Station regularly.
- The bail bond is to be executed before the lower Court.
- The lower Court has the power to modify or relax the conditions as per the law.
- The applicant can only be released if not required in connection with any other offence at the moment.
- The application for bail is allowed.
Case Title: HARDIK @ BHAGAT JIVANBHAI GOVINDIYA (GOVIDIYA) Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.MA/10575/2024
