In a recent judgment by the Gujarat High Court, regular bail has been granted in the case of Godhra City ‘B’ Division Police Station v. [Applicant-accused]. The Court carefully considered the allegations and found it fit to grant bail to the applicant. This decision showcases the Court’s exercise of discretion in criminal matters. Stay updated with this significant legal development! #LegalJudgment #HighCourtDecision
Facts
- The present application is filed for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- The FIR was registered with the Godhra City ‘B’ Division Police Station, Panchmahal.
- The offences mentioned in the FIR are punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 34, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
- Rule is returnable forthwith in this case.
- Learned APP has waived the service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.
Arguments
- The offences are exclusively triable by the Court of Magistrate.
- The present applicant is alleged to have supported the main accused, with no other allegations against him.
- The bail application was made after the submission of the chargesheet.
- The applicant-accused did not receive any monetary gain from the said transaction.
- No chance of tampering with documents as the applicant gained no monetary benefit.
- The nature and gravity of the offence has led the APP to oppose regular bail.
- The role of the present applicant is clearly outlined in the chargesheet papers.
- The prosecution’s case relies on documentary evidence, already collected during the investigation.
- The applicant-accused, being a retired Talati, is in contact with the accused no.1.
- The present applicant-accused has been in jail since 29.12.2023.
- Learned APP has submitted that discretionary power of the Court is not required to be exercised in favor of the applicant-accused.
- The learned advocates for both parties do not press for a further reasoned order.
- The Court has considered the role attributed to the applicant-accused in the case.
- The Court has reviewed the papers of the investigation and the allegations against the applicant.
- The role played by the applicant in the case has been taken into account.
Analysis
- Investigation completed and charge-sheet filed
- Offences exclusively triable by Court of Magistrate
- Prosecution’s case relies on documentary evidence
- All necessary documents collected during investigation
- In the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, the Court considered the nature of allegations made against the applicant in the FIR.
- Without discussing the evidence in detail, the Court found it to be a fit case to exercise discretion and grant regular bail to the applicant.
Decision
- The present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail.
- The bail amount is set at Rs. 15,000 with one surety of the same amount.
- The applicant must not misuse the liberty granted and should not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution.
- He must surrender any passport to the lower court within a week and cannot leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission.
- The applicant must report to the concerned Police Station on alternate Mondays of every English calendar month for six months.
- He should provide his current address to the Investigating Officer and the Court and cannot change residence without prior permission.
- The applicant will only be released if not required in connection with any other offence.
- If any of the conditions are breached, the Sessions Judge can take appropriate action.
- Bail bond must be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction.
- The concerned Court can modify or relax any conditions in accordance with the law.
- The trial Court should not be influenced by any preliminary observations made by this Court while granting bail.
- The Rule is made absolute to the above extent with direct service permitted.
Case Title: RAFIQAHMED IBRAHIM MALEK Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.MA/8411/2024
