SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Khumansinh Dolatsinh Solanki vs State Of Gujarat on 1 August, 2019

R/CR.MA/8023/2019 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 8023 of 2019

KHUMANSINH DOLATSINH SOLANKI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR MANAV A MEHTA(3246) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR LB DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

Date : 01/08/2019

ORAL ORDER

1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in

connection with FIR being C.R. No.I-117 of 2018

registered with Kalol Police Station, District : Panchmahal,

for offence under Sections 306, Section498A and Section114 of the

Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant

submits that considering the nature of the offence, the

applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing

suitable conditions.

3. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State

has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature

and gravity of the offence.

Page 1 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Aug 02 01:55:40 IST 2019

R/CR.MA/8023/2019 ORDER

4. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective

parties do not press for further reasoned order.

5. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and

perusing the material placed on record and taking into

consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations,

gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused,

without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court is of

the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the

discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

6. This Court has also considered the following aspects:

(a) the applicant is in Jail since 01.11.2018;

(b) investigation is concluded and charge-sheet is filed;

(c) marriage span of the present applicant with the
deceased is 14 years;

(d) this Court has considered the allegations levelled
against the applicant in the FIR. It is alleged that the
applicant is having extra-marital relationship with
another lady, as a result of which, the wife of the
applicant has committed suicide;

(e) learned advocate for the applicant has placed
reliance upon the decision rendered by the
Honourable Supreme Court in the case of K.V.
Prakash Babu Vs. State of Karnataka, rendered
on 22.11.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal Nos.1138
of 2018 and 1139 of 2016, wherein the Honourable
Supreme Court has held in Paragraph-16 as under:

Page 2 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Aug 02 01:55:40 IST 2019

R/CR.MA/8023/2019 ORDER

“16. The concept of mental cruelty depends upon
the milieu and the strata from which the persons
come from and definitely has an individualistic
perception regard being had to one’s endurance
and sensitivity. It is difficult to generalize but
certainly it can be appreciated in a set of
established facts. Extra-marital relationship, per
se, or as such would not come within the ambit of
Section 498-A IPC. It would be an illegal or
immoral act, but other ingredients are to be
brought home so that it would constitute a
criminal offence. There is no denial of the fact that
the cruelty need not be physical but a mental
torture or abnormal behaviour that amounts to
cruelty or harassment in a given case. It will
depend upon the facts of the said case. To
explicate, solely because the husband is involved
in an extra-marital relationship and there is some
suspicion in the mind of wife, that cannot be
regarded as mental cruelty which would attract
mental cruelty for satisfying the ingredients of
Section 306 IPC.”

(d) keeping in view the aforesaid decision rendered by
the Honourable Supreme Court and looking to the
facts and circumstances of the present case, this
Court is inclined to exercise discretion in favour of
the applicant;

7. 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.

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

is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection

with FIR being C.R. No.I-117 of 2018 registered with Kalol

Page 3 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Aug 02 01:55:40 IST 2019
R/CR.MA/8023/2019 ORDER

Police Station, District : Panchmahal, 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 prosecution;

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court
within a week;

[d] not leave India without prior permission of the
concerned Trial Court;

[e] mark presence before the concerned Police
Station between 1st to 10th day 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;

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.

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

Page 4 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Aug 02 01:55:40 IST 2019
R/CR.MA/8023/2019 ORDER

above conditions, in accordance with law.

10. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the

prima facie observations made by this Court in the

present order.

12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct

service is permitted.

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J)
KUMAR ALOK

Page 5 of 5

Downloaded on : Fri Aug 02 01:55:40 IST 2019

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation