Gujarat High Court
Punmaram Varingaram Bishnoi vs State Of Gujarat on 8 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5603/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 01/05/2025
Pronounced On : 08/05/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 5603 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
PUNMARAM VARINGARAM BISHNOI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. ROHAN SHAH, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
CAV JUDGMENT
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of
notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. The present successive application is filed under Section
483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for regular
bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11210008221154
of 2022 registered with the Sarthana Police Station, Surat of
the offence punishable under Sections 8(C), 18(B) and 29 of
the NDPS Act.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5603/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2025
undefined
3. Learned advocate Mr. Kishan Daiya appearing for the
applicant has submitted that the applicant-accused was
arrested on 18.07.2022 and since then he is in jail. Learned
advocate Mr. Daiya has also submitted that the investigation
has already been completed and charge-sheet has also been
filed. He has further submitted that this is a second round of
litigation, and the earlier bail application came to be withdrawn
with a liberty to file fresh application after some time. Learned
advocate Mr. Daiya has also submitted that the applicant-
accused was arrested on 18.07.2022 and since then he is in
judicial custody, i.e., for more than two and half years, and the
prosecuting agency, while submitting charge-sheet, has cited
total 26 witnesses to be examined, out of which, only two
witnesses have been examined so far, which is indicative of
the fact that the trial is likely to take long time to conclude,
and as such, considering the period of incarceration already
undergone by the applicant-accused, keeping him behind the
bar for such an indefinite period would be nothing but a pre-
trial conviction to the applicant-accused. Moreover, at the
time of preferring the earlier bail application, copy of the FSL
report was not there, and now the FSL report is also there on
record, and looking to the report of the FSL, it appears that the
quantity of the contraband drug is an intermediate quantity,
and as such, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not be
attracted. It is moreso submitted that the applicant-accused is
suffering from HIV, which can be verified from the jail record,
which indicates that the applicant-accused is taking regular
treatment of the said disease in the jail since last many years.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5603/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2025
undefined
Moreover, the applicant-accused does not have any past
antecedents. Under the circumstances, learned advocate Mr.
Daiya prays that the applicant may be enlarged on bail on any
suitable terms and conditions.
4. The learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-
State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature
and gravity of the offence. Learned APP has submitted that
considering the role attributed to the applicant-accused, this is
a fit case wherein discretionary power of this Court is not
required to be exercised in favour of the applicant-accused.
5. The 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. This Court
has also considered the following aspects;
a) That the investigation has already been completed and
charge-sheet has also been filed;
b) That the applicant-accused is in jail since 18.07.2022, i.e,
for more than two and half years, and considering the fact that
only two witnesses have been examined so far out of 26
witnesses cited by the prosecuting agency, the trial is likely to
take long time to conclude, and as such, considering the period
of incarceration already undergone by the applicant-accused,
he is entitled to be released on bail;
c) The applicant-accused does not have any past
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5603/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2025
undefined
antecedents;
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.
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 and the
applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in
connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11210008221154 of
2022 registered with the Sarthana Police Station, Surat, on
executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand only) with one surety of 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 lower court within
a week;
[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior
permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5603/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2025
undefined
[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 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 applicant on bail.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J)
VAHID
