Hussain Daudbhai Chavda vs State Of Gujarat on 13 January, 2025

0
36

Gujarat High Court

Hussain Daudbhai Chavda vs State Of Gujarat on 13 January, 2025

                                                                                                              NEUTRAL CITATION




                           R/CR.MA/24184/2024                                   ORDER DATED: 13/01/2025

                                                                                                              undefined




                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                        R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
                                   AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 24184 of 2024

                      ==========================================================
                                                  HUSSAIN DAUDBHAI CHAVDA
                                                           Versus
                                                     STATE OF GUJARAT
                      ==========================================================
                      Appearance:
                      MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                      MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                      ==========================================================
                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                                            Date : 13/01/2025

                                                             ORAL ORDER

[1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

[2.0] The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in
connection with FIR being C.R. No.11202009241437 of 2024 registered
with Jamnagar City ‘B’ Division Police Station, Jamnagar, for the offence
under Sections 120B, 381, 385, 386, 406, 411, 413, 414, 420, 422, 424, 506
and 506(2) of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants submits that
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence.
Chargesheet has been filed. Co-accused are enlarged on bail and therefore,
on the ground of parity also, applicant deserves bail. The applicant has been
arraigned as an accused in the guise of conspiracy, but he has not extorted
money or administered threats. Co-accused have obtained loan from finance
company and thereafter, unauthorizedly handed over the present applicant.
Allegation against the applicant is that, as and when authorized officers
came to recover the said loan amount, rather to return possession the
vehicle or to make payment, the accused have administered threats to the

Page 1 of 4

Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Thu Jan 16 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 16 21:40:00 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/24184/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2025

undefined

officers and thereby, committed offence. He therefore submits that,
considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on
regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

[4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has
opposed the present application and submitted that, the applicant is having
similar nature of offence in past and if he is released on bail, possibility
cannot be ruled out to indulge himself in such type of illegal activities in
future also. The applicant and co-accused have caused loss to the finance
company by keeping unauthorizedly possession of the vehicles. In such
circumstances, application does not deserve any consideration.

[5.0] 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.

[6.0] I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects
have been considered:

                      (1)       Chargesheet has been filed;
                      (2)       Applicant is behind the bar since 11.09.2024.
                      (3)       There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant;
                      (4)       63 witnesses are cited by prosecution and therefore, there is no


                                                            Page 2 of 4

Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Thu Jan 16 2025                         Downloaded on : Thu Jan 16 21:40:00 IST 2025
                                                                                                                    NEUTRAL CITATION




                            R/CR.MA/24184/2024                                      ORDER DATED: 13/01/2025

                                                                                                                   undefined




possibility to conclude the trial in near future.

(5) No direct prevy of contract with the applicant is there.
(6) Vehicle is seized by the investigating officer;
(7) Out of 9 offences, the applicant has been acquitted in 3 offences
and 6 are pending.

(8) Co-accused are enlarged by this Court and therefore, on the
ground of parity also (Rameshbhai Batubhai Dhabi Vs. State of
Gujarat
reported in 2011 (3) GLR 1999), present application
deserves consideration.

(9) Merely having past antecedents is not a ground to refuse bail,
especially considering that the accused is presumed innocent
until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

[7.0] 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.

[8.0] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature
of the allegations made against the applicants 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.
Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be
released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.
No.11202009241437 of 2024 registered with Jamnagar City ‘B’ Division
Police Station, Jamnagar, on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/-



                                                               Page 3 of 4

Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Thu Jan 16 2025                              Downloaded on : Thu Jan 16 21:40:00 IST 2025
                                                                                                               NEUTRAL CITATION




                           R/CR.MA/24184/2024                                   ORDER DATED: 13/01/2025

                                                                                                              undefined




(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;

(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution &
shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall
not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be
collected by the police;

(c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week;

(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the
Trial Court concerned;

(e) mark presence before the concerned police station once in a
month for a period of six months;

(f) furnish the 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/contact number without
prior permission of Trial Court;

[9.0] 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.
[10.0] 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.
[11.0] 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 applicants on bail.

[12.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
SUCHIT

Page 4 of 4

Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Thu Jan 16 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 16 21:40:00 IST 2025



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here