Gujarat High Court
Amit @ Lalu Zalim Mahendrasingh ... vs State Of Gujarat on 22 September, 2022
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
R/CR.MA/12941/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 12941 of 2022
==========================================================
AMIT @ LALU ZALIM MAHENDRASINGH RAJPUT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARDIK A DAVE(3764) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MAITHILI MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 22/09/2022
ORAL ORDER
1 Heard learned advocate Mr.Hardik Dave for
the applicant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor Ms. Maithili Mehta for the respondent -
State.
2 This application is filed by the applicant
under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 for regular bail in connection with the FIR
registered at C.R.No.11824001211106 of 2021 with
Vyara Police Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 302, 307, 324, 201, 212, 225, 114 and
120-B of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135
of the Gujarat Police Act.
R/CR.MA/12941/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2022
3 Learned advocate for the applicant
submitted that, the applicant is not involved in
commission of offence as alleged in the FIR and
therefore, looking to the role of the applicant and
nature of the allegations, the applicant is required
to be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable
terms and conditions.
4 On the other hand, learned APP appearing
for the respondent - State opposed grant of regular
bail on the ground that there are as many as 15
antecedents against the applicant, including offence
under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code
and at present the applicant has been arrested under
the provisions of the Gujarat Control of Terrorism
and Organised Crime Act, and therefore, he may not be
enlarged on bail in exercise of powers under Section
439 of the Code.
5 In response to the above, Mr.Hardik Dave,
learned advocate for the applicant relying upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. reported
in 2012 CRI.L.J. 1444, more particularly para 6 of
the judgment, submitted that merely on the basis of
criminal antecedents the claim of the accused for
grant of bail cannot be rejected.
5.1 Mr.Dave, learned advocate for the applicant
R/CR.MA/12941/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2022
by relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of
U.P. & Anr. in Criminal Appeal No.153 of 2020 decided
on 24.1.2020, more particularly para 7 of the
judgment, submitted that in that matter also there
were several criminal cases pending against the
accused person and yet the Hon'ble Supreme Court
categorically observed that pendency of several
criminal cases cannot be a basis for refusal of
prayer for bail.
5.2 Mr.Dave, learned advocate for the applicant
also by relying upon order dated 25.1.2018 passed by
co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc.
Application No.1414 of 2018 in the case of Anil
@Dabli Mansukhbhai Bariya, submitted that despite
having 35 offences against the accused in that case,
the Court granted bail considering the role of the
accused. Learned advocate for the applicant lastly
submitted that considering the ratio laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court, the applicant
may be enlarged on bail.
6 In the facts and circumstances of the case
and considering the nature of allegations, this Court
is of the opinion that, discretion is required to be
exercised to enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
This Court has considered the following facts while
exercising discretion in favour of the applicant:-
R/CR.MA/12941/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2022
[a] The applicant is in jail since 12.8.2021.
[b] Investigation is over and charge sheet is
filed.
[c] The role attributed to the applicant is
that he has provided shelter to the main
accused, who has committed offence under Section
302 of the Indian Penal Code, and therefore,
role of the applicant is that of harbouring
under Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code and
even if the applicant is convicted, maximum
punishment prescribed as per law is 5 years.
[d] Co-accused - Sanjaybhai @Tiklo Govindbhai
Rabari is enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench
of this Court in Criminal Misc. Application
No.4854 of 2022 vide order dated 29.6.2022.
[e] In the instant case, though the present
applicant is having 15 criminal antecedents, but
considering role attributed to the applicant and
the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the cases of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi
(supra) and Prabhakar Tewari (supra), this Court
is inclined to grant bail to the present
applicant.
R/CR.MA/12941/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2022
7 In view of the aforesaid facts, without
discussing the evidence in detail, this Court, prima
facie, is of the opinion that, this is a fit case to
exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on
regular bail. Hence, present application is allowed
and the applicant is ordered to be released on
regular bail in connection with the FIR registered at
C.R.No.11824001211106 of 2021 with Vyara Police
Station on executing personal bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten thousand only) with one surety of the
like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Court and subject to the conditions that the
applicant shall;
[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or
misuse liberty;
[b] not act in a manner injurious to the
interest of the prosecution;
[c] not to leave Surat City without prior
permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;
[d] surrender passport, if any, to the lower
court within a week;
[e] furnish the present address of residence
along with the proof to the Investigating
Officer concerned and also to the Court at the
R/CR.MA/12941/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2022
time of execution of the bond and shall not
change the residence without prior permission of
the Sessions Court concerned;
[f] mark his presence before the concerned
police station in the first week of every month
till the trial is over;
[g] appear before the Investigating Officer
concerned, as and when required for
investigation purpose and attend the Court
concerned regularly.
8 The Authorities will release the applicant
only if the applicant is not required in connection
with any other offence for the time being. If breach
of any of the above conditions is committed, the
Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue
warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
9 Bail bond to be executed before the learned
Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It
will be open for the concerned Court to delete,
modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in
accordance with law. At the trial, learned Trial
Court shall not be influenced by the observations of
preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage,
made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on
bail.
R/CR.MA/12941/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/09/2022
10 The application is allowed in the aforesaid
terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
P. SUBRAHMANYAM
