In a recent landmark judgement, the Gujarat High Court has granted regular bail to the accused in connection with FIR C.R. No.11211045210344/2021. This decision comes following a thorough examination of the evidence and relevant legal precedents. Justice prevails as the accused is set to be released on bail, marking a significant development in the legal proceedings.
Facts
- Application filed for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- The FIR was registered for multiple offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, Arms Act, and Gujarat Police Act.
- The incident took place on 06.12.2021 and the applicant was arrested on 04.03.2022.
- The applicant is currently in judicial custody.
- The investigation has been completed, and the chargesheet has been submitted.
- The FIR was lodged against a total of 8 accused individuals, with the applicant being accused no.4.
Arguments
- The prosecution initially had another eyewitness who stated the present applicant was holding an iron pipe and inflicted blows on the body of the advocate.
- The witnesses changed their statements later to claim the present applicant as the main accused and conspirator of the crime.
- One of the co-accused made a phone call to the accused after the crime was completed, indicating the completion of work.
- The complainant initially mentioned one of the co-accused tried to dash a dumper with their vehicle but later changed the version to include two dumpers and one Bolero at the time of the incident.
- The prosecution’s story changed from time to time to involve more individuals in the crime, evident from the varying statements of witnesses.
- The injured witness initially did not disclose the name of the present applicant, even in the dying declaration but later claimed the applicant was actively involved, with firearms and axe.
- Overall, the advocate argues that the prosecution’s narrative is inconsistent and aimed at implicating maximum individuals in the crime.
- Complainant and witnesses fabricated different stories to implicate the applicant in the crime and increase its gravity.
- The complainant submitted an application during the charge framing stage, alleging discrepancies in the investigation and requesting further investigation instead of framing charges.
- The applicant’s involvement in the crime is established through the complaint and charge sheet.
- There were hostile relations between the complainant and the accused prior to the incident, with threats of elimination made by the accused.
- The accused allegedly carried out a premeditated and aggressive attack with deadly weapons, causing serious injuries to the victims.
- The gravity and nature of the offence cited by the respondent’s APP opposes the grant of regular bail.
Analysis
- Initial FIR mentioned specific name and role of present applicant
- Witnesses changed their statements during investigation regarding the applicant’s role
- Prosecution alleges main accused actively participated in the crime, applicant implicated
- Main accused claims to have alibi supported by documents
- Investigation completed, application filed after chargesheet submission
- Other witnesses describe applicant’s role in the crime in categorical terms
- Applicant arrested and in judicial custody due to severe injuries
- Accused allegedly used iron pipe, made phone call post crime, muddamal pipe recovered
- The judge considers this a fit case to exercise discretionary power in favor of the applicant-accused.
- The judge has taken into account relevant legal precedents such as the case of Sanjay Chandra v. CBI and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
- Without delving into detailed evidence, the judge opines that this is a suitable case to grant regular bail to the applicant based on the nature of allegations in the FIR.
Decision
- The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR C.R. No.11211045210344/2021.
- He must execute a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
- The applicant must adhere to several conditions including not misusing his liberty, not acting against the prosecution’s interest, surrendering his passport to the lower court within a week, not leaving Gujarat without permission, marking presence at the Police Station on alternate Mondays for six months, and providing his current address to the court.
- If any of the conditions are breached, the Sessions Judge is authorized to issue a warrant or take appropriate action.
Case Title: BHARATBHAI AALEGBHAI KHARTANI (KHAVAD) Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.MA/8193/2024
