Gujarat High Court
Rahul Sureshbhai Ninama vs State Of Gujarat on 9 September, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17031/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 17031 of 2024
(FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET)
=======================================================
RAHUL SURESHBHAI NINAMA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=======================================================
Appearance:
MR KARTIKSINH H CHAMPAVAT for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR LAKSHIT V PATEL for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JAY MEHTA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=======================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 09/09/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule
for respondent - State of Gujarat.
2. The present application, which is a successive
bail application after the withdrawal of earlier
bail application being Criminal Misc. Application
No.21327/2023 granting liberty to file fresh after
a period of six months, is filed under Section 439
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for
regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.
No.11208003230708/2023 registered with the
Gandhigram-2 (University) Police Station, Rajkot
for the offence punishable under Sections 394,
395, 397, 398, 323, 455, 506(2) and 120(B) of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that
the so-called incident has taken place on
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17031/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2024
undefined
13.07.2023, for which, the FIR has been lodged on
13.07.2023 and the applicant has been arrested in
connection with the same on 02.08.2023 and since
then, he is in judicial custody. Learned advocate
submitted that now the investigation is completed
and after submission of the chargesheet, the
present application is preferred. Learned advocate
submitted that as stated above, the present
application is a successive bail application,
which is filed pursuant to the liberty granted by
this Court to approach again after a period of six
months and the applicant is in jail since last
more than year. Learned advocate submitted that at
the time of submission of chargesheet, the
prosecution has put reliance upon statement of
witnesses and there are 33 witnesses cited
witnesses in the chargesheet, out of of which, not
a single witness has been examined by the
prosecution and considering the voluminous record
and number of witnesses, it will take considerable
time to conclude the trial within near future.
Learned advocate submitted that recently, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterating earlier
judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
considered the aspect that "jail is rule and
denial is exception", therefore considering the
period of incarceration undergone by the
applicant, he is entitled to be released on bail.
It is, therefore, urged that considering the
nature of the offence, the applicant may be
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17031/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2024
undefined
enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable
conditions.
4. Learned APP for the respondent-State has opposed
grant of regular bail looking to the nature and
gravity of the offence. It is submitted that the
role of the present applicant is clearly spelt out
from the papers of the chargesheet. Learned APP
submitted that chargesheet is filed and the trial
has already commenced. Learned APP submitted that
applicant has been identified in TI Parade and
stolen muddamal has been recovered from the
applicant. It is, therefore, urged that the
present application may not be entertained.
5. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties do not press for further
reasoned order.
6. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on
behalf of the respective parties and perused the
papers of the investigation and considered the
allegations levelled against the applicant and the
role played by the applicant. It is found out from
the record that the present application is
preferred after submission of the chargesheet and
now the investigation is completed and the
applicant is in jail since 02.08.2023 i.e. since
last more than year. I have considered the role
attributed to the present applicant at the time of
commission of crime. I have also considered the
recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court,
wherein specific observations have been made with
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17031/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2024
undefined
regard to the grant of bail. It is also found out
that there are voluminous record in the papers of
the chargesheet and number of witnesses have been
cited as prosecution and it will take considerable
long period of time to conclude the trial.
Therefore considering the above factual aspects as
also considering the incarceration period spent y
the applicant, the present application deserves to
be allowed.
7. This Court has also taken into consideration the
law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of
Investigation, reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40 as well
as in case of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central
Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022)
10 SCC 51.
8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the nature of the allegations made
against the applicant in the FIR, without
discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie,
this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit
case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the
applicant on regular bail.
9. Hence, the present application is allowed. The
applicant is ordered to be released on regular
bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.
No.11208003230708/2023 registered with the
Gandhigram-2 (University) Police Station, Rajkot
on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17031/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2024
undefined
the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;
[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse
liberty;
[b] not act in a manner injuries to the interest
of the prosecution;
[c] surrender passport, if any, to the concerned
court within a week;
[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior
permission of the concerned court;
[e] mark presence before the concerned Police
Station on alternate Monday of every English
calendar month for a period of six months
between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;
[f] furnish the present address of residence to
the Investigating Officer and also to the
Court at the time of execution of the bond
and shall not change the residence without
prior permission of this Court;
10. The authorities will release the applicant only if
he is not required in connection with any other
offence for the time being. If breach of any of
the above conditions is committed, the concerned
Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue
warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
Bail bond to be executed before the 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17031/2024 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2024
undefined
11. At the trial, the 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.
12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.)
Gautam
