Gujarat High Court
Harshil S/O Karansinh Govindbhai Rana vs State Of Gujarat on 25 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1252/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL - AFTER
CHARGESHEET) NO. 1252 of 2025
==========================================================
HARSHIL S/O KARANSINH GOVINDBHAI RANA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. DEVANG D DAVE(2627) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR NITINBHAI M DESAI(13406) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR.KIRIT R CHAUDHARI(3745) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. UTKARSH SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 25/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No.11216001230758 of 2023 registered with Police Station, District Ahmedabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
2. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 07.03.2024 and since then, he is in custody. Learned advocate for the applicant has sought to rely upon the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deshraj @ Musa vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. and submitted that the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
Page 1 of 2 Uploaded by NABILA A. VHORA(HC00630) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 03 12:43:21 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1252/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined
3. Learned APP appearing for the respondent State has vehemently submitted that the offences alleged against the present applicant is serious in nature. He has further submitted that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and looking to the facts as well as the allegations made against the applicant, no discretion should be exercised.
4. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the documents produced on record.
5. This court vide order dated 28.03.2025 had directed the learned trial court to submit its report as regards current status of trial and accordingly, the learned trial court has submitted its report which indicates that out of 28 witnesses cited by the prosecution in the charge sheet, 13 witnesses have been examined and the trial of the offence has been commenced.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment rendered in the case of X vs. State of Rajasthan has observed in Para-14 as under :-
"14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape, murder, dacoity etc. once the trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the Court be it the trial Court or the High Court should be loath in entertaining the bail application of the accused."
7. Considering this aspect, this Court is not inclined to exercise its judicial discretion in favour of the applicant. The application is dismissed.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J) NABILA Page 2 of 2 Uploaded by NABILA A. VHORA(HC00630) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 03 12:43:21 IST 2025