Bhavesh Rameshbhai Ramani vs State Of Gujarat on 4 July, 2017

R/CR.MA/15279/2017 ORDER



STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)

MR DIPEN K DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
No. 1


Date : 04/07/2017


1. Learned Advocate Mr. Yash Joshi appears for the original

complainant and is permitted to file his Vakalatnama. The

affidavit of the original complainant is taken on record.

2. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in

connection with FIR registered as C.R.No.I-134/2017

with Mahila Police Station, Rajkot City for the offence

punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian

Penal Code.

Page 1 of 5

HC-NIC Page 1 of 5 Created On Wed Jul 05 02:47:44 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/15279/2017 ORDER

3. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant

submits that considering the nature of offence, the

applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing

suitable conditions.

4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has

opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and

gravity of the offence.

5. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective

parties do not press for a further reasoned order.

6. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of

the respective parties and perused the papers. Following

aspects are considered :-

I) The chargesheet is filed;

II) The marriage span is of 12 years;

READ  Navneet Balkrishna Naidu-vs-The State Of Maharashtra on 26 April, 2005

III) The minor son out of the wedlock is being taken care of

by the applicant himself and;

IV) The original complainant has appeared through learned

Advocate Mr. Yash Joshi and has filed an affidavit stating

that he has no objection to grant of regular bail to the

Page 2 of 5

HC-NIC Page 2 of 5 Created On Wed Jul 05 02:47:44 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/15279/2017 ORDER

applicant herein.

This Court has 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.

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering

the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in

the First Information Report, 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.

8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is

ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with

C.R. No.I-134/2017 with Mahila Police Station, Rajkot

City on executing a personal 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 liberty or misuse liberty;

(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the

Page 3 of 5

HC-NIC Page 3 of 5 Created On Wed Jul 05 02:47:44 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/15279/2017 ORDER

READ  Devender Kumar & Anr Etc. Vs. State Of Haryana & Ors. Etc. on 5 May, 2010


(c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower Court within a


(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission

of the Sessions Judge concerned;

(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 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

without prior permission of this Court;

9. 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. 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.

Page 4 of 5

HC-NIC Page 4 of 5 Created On Wed Jul 05 02:47:44 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/15279/2017 ORDER

11. 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.

12. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct

Service is permitted.

READ  Smt Kanupriya vs Ashutosh Agrawal on 5 July, 2017


(A.Y. KOGJE, J.)

Page 5 of 5

HC-NIC Page 5 of 5 Created On Wed Jul 05 02:47:44 IST 2017

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *