Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Sushilbhai Bachhanbhai Pande on 7 December, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18438/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL) NO.
18438 of 2023
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SUSHILBHAI BACHHANBHAI PANDE
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 07/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of the present petition under Section 439(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner-State has
prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 21.06.2023
passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bharuch, in
Criminal Misc. Application No. 706 of 2023, whereby the
learned Session Judge has granted regular bail to the
respondent - original accused.
2. Heard learned APP for the petitioner State.
3. In 'Bhagwan Singh v Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @
Depak', reported in 2023 INSC 7613, this Court after
considering judgment in case of 'Dolat Ram v State of
Haryana', (1995) 1 SCC 349; 'Kashmira Singh v Duman
Singh', (1996) 4 SCC 693, and 'X v State of Telangana',
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18438/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023
undefined
(2018) 16 SCC 511, held as follows:
'13. It is also required to be borne in mind that when a prayer
is made for the cancellation of grant of bail cogent and
overwhelming circumstances must be present and bail once
granted cannot be cancelled in a mechanical manner without
considering whether any supervening circumstances have
rendered it in conducing to allow fair trial. This proposition
draws support from the Judgment of this Court in Daulat Ram
and others v. State of Haryana reported in (1995) 1 SCC 349,
Kashmira Singh v. Duman Singh (1996) 4 SCC 693 and xxx
v. State of Telangana (2018) 16 SCC 511.'
4. Learned APP though strongly argued to cancel the regular
bail on submission that the learned Sessions Court while
granting the bail did not consider the factors to be considered
for granting or rejecting the bail and has failed to submit any
supervening circumstances being rendered it in conducing to
allow fair trial.
5. Learned APP also argued that the learned Sessions Court
failed to notice that the deceased committed suicide within
very short-span of her marriage life, i.e. three years, and
therefore the presumption under Section 113 of the Code shall
be available against the accused-Respondent. It was also
submitted that the accused had threatened the independent
witness of dire consequences on 06.04.2023. It was thus
prayed that this application be allowed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18438/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023
undefined
6. Having heard the learned APP, this Court finds no
circumstances to adjudge the impugned order as unjust and
contrary to the settled principles of law. As held earlier, the
petitioner has failed to point out supervening circumstances,
which may interfere with the conducting of free and fair trial.
7. Before parting with the order, I may also refer to the
observations made in the recent decision by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in case of 'Kekhriesatuo Tep and others Vs.National
Investigating Agency', reported in (2023) 6 SCC 58. The
relevant observation made in para 19 reads as under:-
"The Special Judge has himself distinguished cases of the
persons who have indulged into extortion for furthering the
activities of the organisation and red the persons like the
present appellants, who were government servants, and er,
compelled to contribute the amount. Hence, it cannot be said
that the prima ell facie opinion, as expressed by the Special
Judge, could be said to be perverse or impossible."
8. Resultantly, present petition fails and stands rejected in
liminie.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
UMESH/-
