SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rahulbhai Dharamdas Vasava vs State Of Gujarat on 2 April, 2019

R/CR.MA/6317/2019 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 6317 of 2019

RAHULBHAI DHARAMDAS VASAVA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR JOY MATHEW(448) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
RONITH JOY(9560) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JK SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

Date : 02/04/2019

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on
behalf of the respondent State.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant does not
press this application for applicant No.1 at
this stage as the charge­sheet is not filed.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of
as not pressed qua applicant No.1. However,
liberty is reserved to applicant No.1 to file
a fresh application after filing of the
charge­sheet before the Sessions Court. It is
clarified that this Court has not examined
the merits of the case of the applicant No.1
at this stage.

3. The present application is filed under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, for regular bail of

Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/6317/2019 ORDER

applicant Nos. 2 and 3 in connection with FIR
being C.R.No.I­3 of 2019 registered with
Sagbara Police Station, District Narmada for
offence under section 498A, 306 and 114 of
the IPC.

4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
applicant Nos. 2 and 3 submits that
considering the nature of the offence, the
applicants may be enlarged on regular bail by
imposing suitable conditions.

5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the
respondent­State has opposed grant of regular
bail looking to the nature and gravity of the
offence.

6. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties do not press for further
reasoned order.

7. 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 Nos. 2 and 3 on
regular bail.

8. This Court has also considered the following
aspects:

Page 2 of 5

R/CR.MA/6317/2019 ORDER

Applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are mother­in­law and
father­in­law of the deceased.
They are in jail since 10.03.2019.
Investigation is almost concluded qua
applicant Nos. 2 and 3.

FIR is filed after a period of 10 days from
the date of incident.

Looking to the role played by the applicant
Nos. 2 and 3 in the present FIR, I am
inclined to exercise the discretion in their
favour.

9. 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.

10. Hence, the present application is allowed.

The applicant Nos. 2 and 3 herein are ordered
to be released on regular bail in connection
with FIR being C.R.No.I­3 of 2019 registered
with Sagbara Police Station, District Narmada
on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/­
(Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with one
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court and subject to the
conditions that they shall;
[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or
misuse liberty;

Page 3 of 5

R/CR.MA/6317/2019 ORDER

[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 the State of Gujarat without
prior permission of the Sessions
Judge concerned;

[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;

11. The authorities will release the applicant
Nos. 2 and 3 herein only if they are 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

Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/6317/2019 ORDER

delete, modify and/or relax any of the above
conditions, in accordance with law.

12. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be
influenced by the prima facie observations
made by this Court in the present order.

13. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid
extent. Direct service is permitted.

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J)
Jani

Page 5 of 5

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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