[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Devang @ Kano Rambhai Chavda vs State Of Gujarat on 28 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/20032/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 20032 of 2025
==========================================================
DEVANG @ KANO RAMBHAI CHAVDA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. BHARAT K. DAVE(246) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. ALOK M. THAKKAR(6510) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. PRAVAN DHAGAT for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 28/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on
regular bail in connection with FIR being CR. No.11202057220608 of 2022
registered with Sikka Police Station, Jamnagar for the offences punishable
under Sections 302, 307, 324, 504, 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section
135 of Gujarat Police Act.
2. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Bharat K. Dave appearing for the
applicant. He submitted that the investigation of the offence is over and chare-
sheet is filed. The applicant has been arrested in connection with the present
offence on 06.12.2022 and since then he is in custody. Initially, the applicant
had preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.19177 of 2023 which was
allowed to be withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 30.11.2023 and liberty
came to be granted to the applicant to file an application afresh after a period of
Six months. The applicant had thereafter preferred CRMA No.13971 of 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/20032/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 20.08.2024. Thereafter, the
applicant had again preferred CRMA No.15201 of 2025 which was withdrawn
by the applicant with a view to approach the learned Sessions Court.
Thereafter, the applicant had approached the learned Sessions Court. However,
in view of the reasoned order passed by this Court dismissing the application
filed by the applicant, learned Sessions Court has declined to exercise its
discretion in favour of the applicant. However, the learned Sessions Court was
inclined to pass an order for conducting the trial on day-to-day basis. The
learned Advocate representing the applicant is a lady aged 72 years, and
therefore, it was not possible for her to appear before the learned Trial Court
every day. The applicant has undergone incarceration for a period of almost
Three years and there is no possibility of trial concluding in the near future. As
held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of judgments, speedy trial of the
offence is a fundamental right guaranteed to the applicant. he, therefore,
submitted to allow the application and enlarge the applicant on bail subject to
suitable conditions. Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has sought to
rely upon the following judgments delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case
of: -
(i) Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh V. State of Maharshtra And Another
reported in (2024) 9 Supreme Court Cases 813 and,
(ii) Tapas Kumar Palit V. State of Chhattisgarh reported in AIR 2025
Supreme Court 940.
3. Learned APP has opposed the present application contending that the
applicant is the main accused in the offence in question. The earlier application
filed by the applicant had been dismissed by this Court vide reasoned order,
and therefore, there being no change in circumstances thereafter, the
application should be dismissed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/20032/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/11/2025
undefined
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Alok Thakkar appearing for the respondent -
original complainant has also opposed the application. He has taken this Court
through the order-sheet of the learned Sessions Court to indicate that the trial
has been delayed at the behest of the present applicant. He, therefore, submitted
to dismiss the application.
5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties. The applicant had earlier
preferred CRMA No.13971 of 2024 which was dismissed by this Court vide
order dated 20.08.2024. While dismissing the said application, this Court had
made the following observations: -
"7. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the
record. From the record, it appears that the present Applicant had
assaulted the deceased as well as the other victims with knife and had
caused several injuries to the deceased as well as other witnesses. Upon
perusal of the investigation it appears that there are several eyewitnesses
to the incident, who, in their statements before the Investigation Officer
have narrated the incident as it happened and a clear role attributed to
the present Applicant is coming fore from the statements of these
witnesses. This Court has also been informed that the trial of the offence
has already commenced and several witnesses have already been
examined."
6. So far as the aspect of delay in trial is concerned, as submitted by the
learned Advocate for the applicant himself that the learned Trial Court is ready
and willing to conduct the trial on day-to-day basis, however the applicant is
not ready and willing for the same. Thus, on one hand the applicant is seeking
bail on the ground of delay in trial and other the other hand he is not ready for
conduct of the trial on day-to-day basis. Having regard to these aspects, no case
is made out. Hence, the present application is dismissed.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
RAVI OZA
