Gujarat High Court
Yunus Osmanbhai Shaikh vs State Of Gujarat on 9 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7056/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 7056 of 2025
==========================================================
YUNUS OSMANBHAI SHAIKH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRATIK Y JASANI(5325) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 09/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed under Section 483 of the
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023, for regular bail in
connection with FIR being C.R.NO. 11198048230437 of 2023
registered with Sonagadh Police Station, Bhavnagar for the
offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B), 201 and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 135 of the Gujarat
Police Act.
2. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that in
present offence, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has
been filed. The applicant has been arrested in connection with
the present offence on 05.10.2023 and since then he is in
custody. Earlier, the applicant had preferred Criminal Misc.
Application No.8020 of 2024, which was withdrawn on
26.04.2024. Thereafter, 6 prosecution witnesses have been
examined before the learned Trial Court and in their depositions,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7056/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
no material indicating the guilt of the present applicant has
come forth. Still, the prosecution is required to examine 35
witnesses, and therefore, there is no chance of the trial of the
present offence getting concluded in the near future. He,
therefore, submitted to allow the present application and enlarge
the present applicant on bail subject to suitable conditions.
3. Learned APP has opposed the present application, inter alia,
contending that this is a successive bail application filed by the
present applicant after withdrawal of the earlier application and
there being no change in circumstances, the present application
should be dismissed.
4. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the
material available on record. At the outset, it is required to be
noted that earlier, the applicant had preferred Criminal Misc.
Application No.8020 of 2024. Learned advocate there appearing
for the applicant, after having argued the matter at length,
sought permission to withdraw the said application, as this
Court was not inclined to exercise its discretion in favour of the
applicant. Thereafter, the present successive bail application has
been filed by the present applicant seeking regular bail. As per
the applicant himself, after withdrawal of the earlier application,
the trial of the offence against the present applicant has
progressed and 6 prosecution witnesses have already been
examined. It is the case on the part of the applicant that from
the deposition of 6 witnesses, who have been examined, nothing
has come forth indicating the complicity of the present applicant
in the offence in question.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7056/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
5. Learned advocate for the applicant has tried to take this
Court through the depositions of those witnesses. It is required
to be noted that the prosecution has cited as many as 54
witnesses in the charge-sheet and out of them, only 6 witnesses
have been examined as yet. Therefore, it would be too early for
this Court to note that there is no material coming forth in the
depositions of the witnesses. The Apex Court in its recent
judgment in case of X. Versus State of Rajasthan & Anr.
passed in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.13378 of 2024
has observed as under:-
"14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape, murder, dacoity, etc.,
once the trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its
witnesses, the Court be it the Trial Court or the High Court should
be loath in entertaining the bail application of the accused.
15. Over a period of time, we have noticed two things, i.e., (i)
either bail is granted after the charge is framed and just before the
victim is to be examined by the prosecution before the trial court,
or (ii) bail is granted once the recording of the oral evidence of the
victim is complete by looking into some discrepancies here or
there in the deposition and thereby testing the credibility of the
victim.
16. We are of the view that the aforesaid is not a correct practice
that the Courts below should adopt. Once the trial commences, it
should be allowed to reach to its final conclusion which may either
result in the conviction of the accused or acquittal of the accused.
The moment the High Court exercises its discretion in favour of
the accused and orders release of the accused on bail by looking
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7056/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
into the deposition of the victim, it will have its own impact on the
pending trial when it comes to appreciating the oral evidence of
the victim. It is only in the event if the trial gets unduly delayed
and that too for no fault on the part of the accused, the Court may
be justified in ordering his release on bail on the ground that right
of the accused to have a speedy trial has been infringed. "
6. So far as the aspect of merits is concerned, from the record, it
appears that there was a previous enmity between the present
applicant and the deceased, and therefore, the applicant along
with the juvenile had hatched a conspiracy for commission of the
present offence and in furtherance thereof, the applicant herein
had initially assaulted the deceased with a hard and blunt
substance, and thereafter, had inflicted indiscriminate blows
with knife upon the deceased. Having regard to these facts, no
case is made to release the present applicant on bail. Hence, the
present application stands dismissed.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
GIRISH
