Gujarat High Court
Rameshsing Anupsing Vaghela ... vs State Of Gujarat on 28 October, 2021
Bench: Ashokkumar C. Joshi
R/CR.MA/19027/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19027 of 2021
==========================================================
RAMESHSING ANUPSING VAGHELA (DARBAR)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. MONALI BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI
Date : 28/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. This Application is filed by the Applicant - Accused under Section 439
of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail
in connection with C.R. No. 11195019211050 registered with Deesa Police
Station, District Banaskantha for the offences punishable under Sections 306,
504, 506(2), 507 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the
Gujarat Police Act.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. P.P.Majmudar for the Applicant and
learned APP Ms. Monali Bhatt for the Respondent State.
3. The factual matrix of the case in nutshell is that on 8.9.2021, at midnight
the deceased son of the complainant did not come to home, therefore, the
complainant called his brother Manilal Revabhai for his whereabouts, and that
on 9.9.2021, in the early morning the complainant's brother and other
relatives / members came with the dead body of the deceased at complainant's
home and informed the complainant that the deceased Deepakkumar has
committed suicide on railway track. That on 7.9.2021 the original accused
persons had come to the complainant's house and searched for deceased
R/CR.MA/19027/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021
Deepak and threatened that where is Deepak and he has become bapu and will
not leave him alive and they are in Mahakal Sena and abused and left. That on
10.9.2021 complainant's relatives informed the complainant that the deceased
has recorded video in his mobile and they have listened the said video wherein
the deceased has said that now make Sanjaysinh bapu, bapu and original
accused Sanjaysinh bapu has threatened and abetted the deceased to commit
suicide.
Submission of the Parties:
4. Learned Advocate for the Applicant / Accused has submitted that the
Applicant Accused is innocent as he has not taken part in the offence as
alleged. He has family roots in the society and therefore, he is not likely to flee
away from justice. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has further submitted
that the Applicant is not even remotely connected with the alleged offence. He
is falsely implicated and that he has not made any video viral of the alleged
offence nor it has been alleged in the FIR. That the deceased in his last video
has not stated the name of the Applicant nor any allegation is made in the video
regarding abetment by the Applicant. It is submitted that it is Sanjaysinh who
has circulated different photographs in the whats app group by writing therein
the names of Rajbapu, Dipakbapu and Mehulbapu on 5.9.2021. But nowhere
the name of the present Applicant is disclosed and as such there is no prima
facie case upon the present Applicant Accused and thus there are no ingredients
under Section 107 IPC coupled with Section 306 IPC. Learned Advocate for
the Applicant has further submitted that the Applicant will abide by whatever
conditions imposed by the Hon'ble Court. He has further vehemently submitted
that there is no direct involvement of the Applicant Accused in the present case
so far as allegation is concerned. There are no antecedents against the
Applicant Accused. He has therefore prayed that discretion may kindly be
exercised and grant bail to the Applicant Accused.
R/CR.MA/19027/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021
5. Per contra, learned APP has vehemently argued that in the present case
the report of the FSL regarding the whats app is still pending and the charge
sheet is still not filed. The learned APP has further urged that on the basis of
the FSL report one may come to the conclusion about the role attributed to the
present Applicant Accused. The learned APP has therefore submitted that
discretion may not be exercised and ultimately the learned APP has opposed
grant of bail looking to the nature and gravity of offence, involvement of the
Applicant / Accused. The learned APP has further submitted that if the Hon'ble
Court is inclined to grant bail then in such case strict conditions may be
imposed to secure the presence of the Applicant Accused.
Merits of the Case:
6. This court has considered the following aspects:
(a) As per catena of decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court, there are mainly
3 factors which are required to be considered by this court i.e. prima facie case,
availability of Applicant accused at the time of trial and tampering and
hampering with the witnesses by the accused.
(b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the
Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away.
(c) That the Applicant Accused is in custody since October 2021.
(d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay
Chandra v. C.B.I. Reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40, wherein it is held that bail is
a rule and jail is an exception.
7. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perusing the
record produced in this case as well as taking into consideration the facts of the
case, nature of allegations, gravity of accusation, availability of the Applicant
Accused at the time of Trial, it is an undisputed fact that the deceased has
committed suicide on his own on the railway track. Looking to the previous
history and the police papers, on the basis of the whats app chatting, there is no
name of the Applicant Accused seems to be circulated wherein the names of
R/CR.MA/19027/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021
difference accused persons are disclosed but nowhere this Court is able to find
out the name of the present Applicant and therefore this Court is of the opinion
that how far the role attributed to the present Applicant for inviting the
ingredients under Section 107 IPC coupled with Section 306 IPC for abetment
of suicide is true which can be said after the conclusion of trial, but at this
juncture before the conclusion of trial i.e. in bail business if the discretion is not
exercised in that case there are all chances of injustice to the Applicant. That is
to say, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sanjay Chandra's
case (supra), bail is a rule and jail is an exception. Therefore, the present
Application deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands allowed. The
Applicant Accused - RAMESHSING ANUPSING VAGHELA is ordered to
be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No. 11195019211050
registered with Deesa Police Station, District Banaskantha on executing a
personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions that he shall:
(a) not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any
person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the
evidence.
(b) maintain law and order and not to indulge in any criminal activities.
(c) furnish the documentary proof of complete, correct and present address of
his residence to the Investigating Officer and to the Trial Court at the time of
executing the bond and shall not change his residence without prior permission
of the trial Court.
(d) provide his contact numbers as well as the contact numbers of the sureties
before the Trial Court. In case of change in such numbers inform in writing
immediately to the trial Court.
(e) file an affidavit stating his immovable properties whether self acquired or
ancestral with description, location and present value of such properties before
the Trial Court, if any.
R/CR.MA/19027/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021
(f) not leave India without prior permission of the Trial Court
(g) mark presence before the concerned police station on every 1st day of
English calendar month between 12:00 Noon and 2:00 PM till one year or till
the trial is concluded, whichever is earlier.
(h) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week. If he does
not possess passport, he shall file an Affidavit to that effect.
(i) shall maintain all the rules and regulations framed by the Municipality
regarding contemporary status of corona virus/Covid-19, State Government or
by any competent authority, including social distancing.
8. Bail bond to be executed before the Trial Court having jurisdiction to try the
case. It would be open for the Trial Court concerned to give time to furnish the
solvency certificate if prayed for.
9. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Trial Court
concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action according to
law. The Authorities will release the Applicant forthwith only if he is not
required in connection with any other offence for the time being.
10. At the trial, the concerned trial Court shall not be influenced by the
prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
11. Rule is made absolute. The Registry is directed to communicate this
order by Fax / by E-mail to the concerned Court / Authority.
(A. C. JOSHI,J)
J.N.W
