In a landmark anticipatory bail judgement, the Gujarat High Court considered the appeal in connection with FIR CR No.11210004240090 of 2024 registered at Amroli Police Station. The court deliberated on the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. v/s. State of Punjab, ensuring a fair balance between the individual’s rights and the interests of society.
Facts
- The appellant has filed an appeal seeking anticipatory bail under Section 14-A(2) of the Act, 1989.
- The appeal is in connection with FIR CR No.11210004240090 of 2024 registered at Amroli Police Station.
- The appellant, who is the original accused, is seeking anticipatory bail in this case.
Arguments
- Learned advocate for the petitioner argues that due to the nature of allegations and the role attributed to the petitioner, anticipatory bail should be granted with suitable conditions.
- The advocate highlights the need for the petitioner to be released on anticipatory bail considering the circumstances of the case.
- It is suggested that the petitioner can be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing appropriate conditions to ensure compliance.
- Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed grant of anticipatory bail
- Nature and gravity of the offence considered in opposition
- Arguments heard from both parties’ learned Advocates
- Parameters for grant or refusal of bail discussed
- Balancing personal liberty and investigational power of police mentioned
- Freedom of individual versus security of State highlighted
- Nature of accusation and evidence supporting it taken into account
- Severity of punishment upon conviction considered
- Balancing individual liberty and interest of society discussed
Analysis
- The FIR lacks allegations attracting Section 354 of the IPC and allegations of humiliating the complainant’s caste in a public place.
- As the alleged offense under Section 354 of the IPC is bailable, no case for custodial interrogation is established.
- The discretion is inclined in favor of the appellant-accused based on the above factors.
- The present appeal is considered worthy of further examination.
- The Court exercised discretion in favor of the petitioner.
- Considered the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v/s. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
- Reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. v/s. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 665.
- Took into consideration law laid down in the case of Sushila Agarwal v/s. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2020) 5 SCC 1].
Decision
- The petitioner must deposit their passport before the trial court within a week.
- If any of the conditions are breached, the trial court judge can take appropriate action.
- If the petitioner is arrested based on FIR CR No.11210004240090 of 2024, they shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 and one surety of the same amount.
- Conditions for bail include cooperating with the investigation, being present at the police station on specified dates, refraining from influencing witnesses, not obstructing the investigation, providing and not changing address without informing authorities, and not leaving India without court permission.
- The Trial Court should not base its decisions on the observations made by the higher court for granting bail.
Case Title: HARSUKHBHAI KESHAVBHAI BALDHA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.A/519/2024
