Gujarat High Court
Varshaben Ashwinbhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 13 February, 2023
Bench: Samir J. Dave
R/CR.MA/2630/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 2630 of 2023
==========================================================
VARSHABEN ASHWINBHAI KHASIYA(GOHIL)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MEHUL A SURATI(7870) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RC KODEKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE
Date : 13/02/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Leaned APP waives service of
notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. The present bail application is filed under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant for regular bail
in connection with an FIR being C.R.No. I-11191018220235 OF
2022 registered with Comtipur Police Station, Dist Ahmedabad
City for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 370, 370(A),
120(B) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 81, 84, 87
of the Juvenile Justice Act.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that
considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the
applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by
imposing suitable conditions. That, investigation of the present
offence has been completed and the investigating officer has filed
charge sheet against the present applicant. That, the applicant is
R/CR.MA/2630/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
totally innocent and is falsely implicated in the commission of the
alleged incident. That, the applicant and accused no. 6 are
husband wife and applicant is having no idea of the child is of
the part of trafficking and done by the accused no. 1 to 4 from
the custody of the complainant. That, the applicant and daughter
of the complainant-victim having no connection as no role has
been attributed to the present applicant. That, the applicant has
no any antecedents except the present case. Ultimately, it was
submitted by learned advocate for the applicant to allow present
application.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on
behalf of the respondent-State has stated that kidnapper of the
girl namely accused Kinjalben and accused Vijayana made
contact to present applicant for selling the girl and therefore,
applicant and her husband had gone to Hyderabad in the vehicle
under their possession, the applicant had made contact of
accused Kinal with the accused Nandiniben and thereby Kinal
sold the girl to Nandiniben in Rs. 1,10,000/- and thereafter,
Nandiben sold the girl to accused Ashok in Rs. 2,00,000/- and
thereby, the applicant has played a vital role in this offence.
Learned APP has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the
nature and gravity of the offence. That, the applicant is involved
in the serious offence as alleged and therefore, no leniency view
R/CR.MA/2630/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
would be taken in favour of the applicant while releasing him on
bail. Ultimately, it was submitted by learned APP for the
respondent-State to reject present application.
5. Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and
learned APP for the respondent-State as well as papers produced
on record, it appears that the applicant has been arrested in
connection with FIR being C.R.No. I-11191018220235 OF 2022
registered with Comtipur Police Station, Dist Ahmedabad City for
the offence punishable under Sections 363, 370, 370(A), 120(B)
and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 81, 84, 87 of the
Juvenile Justice Act.
6. It further appears from the record that the applicant
approached the learned Sessions Court with a request to release
him on regular bail but her request has been rejected by rejecting
bail application by observing that in the investigation of the
Police, it has come out that the applicant has played a vital role in
commission of offence. Not only that, the applicant is involved in
human trafficking offences. Thus, while considering the role and
gravity of offence learned Sessions Court has rejected the bail
application of the applicant.
7. From the record it appears that due to the act of the
applicant, the accused persons have sold the victim girl from one
to another person and such kind of act of the applicant cannot be
R/CR.MA/2630/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
ignored. Of course, this court has to consider the role played by
the applicant as well as gravity of offence aspect while deciding
the bail application of the applicant but, looking to the nature of
offence in the present case and vital role of the applicant in the
commission of offence may not permit this court to exercise the
powers in favour of the applicant because if the applicant is
released on regular bail, social impact thereof cannot be avoided.
8. This court is also aware with the law of bail but with
this, this court has to consider the seriousness of offence and
affect after releasing the applicant on bail. Learned Sessions
Court has clearly observed in its judgment while rejecting the
prayer of bail made by the applicant that the present applicant is
previously also involved in the offence of human trafficking and
therefore, there are entire possibilities if the applicant is released
on bail, she will involve once again in such kind of offence.
9. Thus, as per the aforesaid discussion, this court is not
inclined to accept the prayer of the applicant and accordingly,
present application stands rejected. Rule stands discharged.
(SAMIR J. DAVE,J)
K. S. DARJI
