1. This is an application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant who came to be arrested in connection with FIR registered as CR No. I 93 of 2009 with Himatnagar Rural Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 498(1), 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. In the facts and circumstances of the case and by consent of both the sides, this application is taken up for hearing today.
2. Learned advocate Mr JV Japee for the applicant placing reliance on the FIR submitted that the FIR was given by Mansinh Revusinh and on perusal of the same, the allegations made against the applicant are of a general nature. Considering the role attributed to the applicant, even the provisions of Section 306 would not be attracted. Learned advocate for the applicant has also placed reliance on the statements given by the neighbours and submitted that on perusal of the said statements, the prima facie involvement of the applicant is not made out and considering the role attributed to the applicant, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr Umesh A Trivedi for the State, while opposing the bail application, submitted that the applicant is having the charge under Sections 498(1), 306 and 114 of the IPC. Considering the nature of offence, the manner in which the offence is committed by the applicant and the role of the applicant, no discretionary relief be granted to the applicant and the application deserves to be dismissed.
4. I have heard learned advocate Mr JV Japee for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr Umesh A Trivedi for the State at length and in great detail. I have considered the averments made in the application, the role attributed to the applicant as reflected in the FIR, the provisions of Sections 498(1), 306 and 114 of the IPC, quantum of punishment, etc. as well as the statement of the witnesses which is relied upon by the learned advocate for the applicant. Considering the aforesaid aspects, the applicant, in my view, deserves to be enlarged on bail.
5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection with CR No. I 93 of 2009 with Himatnagar Rural Police Station on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees ten 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 his liberty or abuse his liberty;
[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
[c] surrender his passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week;
[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the Sessions court concerned;
[e] mark his presence at the concerned Police Station on any day of every first week of English calendar month between 9.00 AM and 2.00 PM. till the trial is over;
[f] furnish the present address of his residence to the I.O. and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change his residence without prior permission of this Court;
[g] maintain law and order.
6. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or to take appropriate action in the matter.
7. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.
8. 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 petitioner on bail.
9. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct Service is permitted.
[H.B.
Antani, J.] mrpandya Top