Gujarat High Court
Bharat @ Tako Arabhambhai Modhavadiya vs State Of Gujarat on 5 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/984/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO.
984 of 2025
==========================================================
BHARAT @ TAKO ARABHAMBHAI MODHAVADIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR CHINTAN S POPAT(5004) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 05/05/2025
ORAL ORDER
Though respondent No.2 duly served remained absent.
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of
respondent-State.
2. Present appeal is filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter
referred to as "Atrocity Act") challenging the judgment and order
dated 28.03.2025 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions
Judge, Porbandar in Criminal Misc. Application No.119 of 2025,
whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the
application filed by the present appellant under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS") seeking
regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.No.11218009250016 of
2025 registered with Kamalabaug Police Station, District :
Porbandar for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 352,
351(3), 54 and 123 of the BNS, Section 66e and 67 of the IT Act,
Section 135 of the GP Act and under Sections 3(1)(e), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),
3(1)(a) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the appellant
is not involved in commission of offence as alleged in the FIR and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/984/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
therefore, looking to the role of the appellant and nature of the
allegations, the appellant is required to be enlarged on regular bail by
imposing suitable terms and conditions.
3.1. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that appellant is
arrested on 09.01.2025. In the present case, present appellant is
accused No.1. Complaint is filed belatedly after a period of 15 days
from the commission of alleged offence. It is submitted that present
appellant is innocent and he has falsely roped in the offence. It is
submitted that the allegations levelled against the present appellant
is far from the truth. The allegations against the present appellant is
that he has shot the video in the mobile phone of accused No.1.
Whatever allegations are levelled qua oral sex or forcible to consume
the liquor, but the complaint is filed against the accused No.1. He has
made an assault by kick and feast blow and administered the threat
to remained silent otherwise, he has to face dire consequences and
viral the video, except this no role is attributed to him. Video
recording is already seized. Commencement of trial will take its own
time. It is submitted that nothing is required to be recovered and
discovered from the appellant-accused as charge-sheet is filed.
Therefore, no purpose would be served to keep him behind the bar
for long time. It is further submitted that he is ready and willing to
abide by all the conditions imposed upon him. It is further submitted
that the appellant has no any past criminal antecedents. Hence, he
has requested to allow the present application.
4. On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the respondent - State
vehemently opposed the appeal on the ground that the present
appellant in collussion of the accused No.1 has played active role. The
accused No.1 has committed the offence and the present applicant
has forced the victim to consume the liquor. The complainant belongs
to the scheduled caste and he has shot the video of mobile phone of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/984/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
accused No.1. Thereafter, he made an assault by kick and feast blow
and given intimidation to remain silent, other-wise, he has to face dire
consequences. If he released on bail, possibility cannot be ruled out
to tamper with the evidence. Hence, he has requested this Court to
dismiss the present appeal.
5. While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the
accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be
exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to
the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors
are to be taken into consideration while considering an application
for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the
punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the
prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the
witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii)
reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the
time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character
behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which
are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the
State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.
7. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties and perused the investigation papers. In present
case, the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed.
Following aspects have been considered:
(i) appellant is arrested on 09.01.2025;
(ii) Commencement of trial will take its own time;
(iii) offence is not punishable with life or death;
(iv) nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the
appellant;
(v) The allegations against the present appellant is that he has
shot the video from the mobile phone of accused No.1, which
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/984/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
is already seized and sent to the FSL for examination. He has
delivered kick and feast blow and threat the victim to face dire
consequences, if he disclosed the said incident, except this no
role is attributed to him;
(vi) charge-sheet is filed;
8. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central
Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the
case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High
Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously,
the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind
the bars is nothing but amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore,
considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that "bail
is a rule and jail is exception" as well as the concept of personal liberty
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, present
application deserves consideration.
9. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature
of the allegations made against the appellant 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 appellant on regular bail. Hence, the present appeal is allowed.
The judgment and order dated 28.03.2025 passed by the learned 2 nd
Additional Sessions Judge, Porbandar in Criminal Misc. Application
No.119 of 2025 is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant is
ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being
C.R.No.11218009250016 of 2025 registered with Kamalabaug
Police Station, District : Porbandar, on executing a personal bond
of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one surety
of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to
the conditions that he shall;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/984/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
[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 lower court within a week;
[d] not leave State of Gujarat without prior permission of the
Sessions Judge concerned;
[e] furnish the UIDAI Number, Contact Number/s, Passport Number
(if he is having the passport), E-mail address and present address
of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court
at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the
residence address as well as contact number without prior
permission of Trial Court;
[f] mark presence before the concerned Police Station between 1st
to 10th day of every English calendar month for a period of six
months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;
(g) not enter Porbandar District for six months except for
marking presence and to attend the Court proceedings;
10. The authorities will release the appellant 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 Sessions Judge concerned will be free to
issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
11. 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.
12. 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 appellant on bail.
Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
KUMAR ALOK
