SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Savaram Gomaram Devasi(Rabari) vs State Of Gujarat on 21 November, 2019

R/CR.MA/20220/2019 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 20220 of 2019

SAVARAM GOMARAM DEVASI(RABARI)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR MAYUR RAJGURU(1198) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR SALIM M SAIYED(5172) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR VITHALBHAI R PANSALA(10838) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR.J.K.SHAH, APP, (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

Date : 21/11/2019
ORAL ORDER

1. This application is filed by the applicants under Section
439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in
connection with FIR registered as C.R. No.I-157 of 2019 with
Ankleshwar City Police Station, Bharuch for the offence
punishable under Sections 498A, Section304(B) and Section114 of the Indian
Penal Code.

2. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants
submits that considering the nature of offence, the applicants
may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable
conditions.

3. 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.

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

Page 1 of 4

Downloaded on : Fri Nov 22 02:44:50 IST 2019

R/CR.MA/20220/2019 ORDER

5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf
of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following
aspects are considered :-

I) The First Information Report is registered on
20.07.2019 for the offence which is alleged to have taken
place on 12.07.2019.

II)The applicants are in custody since 30.07.2019.

III) The investigation is concluded and charge-sheet is
filled.

IV) The submission of learned advocate for the applicants
is that though the incident allegedly took place at
Bhaurch, at that time also the applicants were not
physically present there. Moreover, both the applicants
are residing at Rajasthan and Mumbai respectively and
therefore, could not be said to be responsible for day to
day conduct of harassment of the co-accused towards the
deceased.

V)Learned Additional Public Prosecutor under the
instructions of the Investigating Officer is unable to bring
on record any special circumstances against the
applicants.

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of SectionSanjay
Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported
in [2012] 1 SCC 40.

Page 2 of 4

Downloaded on : Fri Nov 22 02:44:50 IST 2019
R/CR.MA/20220/2019 ORDER

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and

considering the nature of the allegations made against the
applicants 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
applicants on regular bail.

7. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicants
are ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with
C.R. No.I-157 of 2019 with Ankleshwar City Police
Station, Bharuch 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;

(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 between 11.00
a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;

(f) furnish the present address of their 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 Trial Court;

Page 3 of 4

Downloaded on : Fri Nov 22 02:44:50 IST 2019

R/CR.MA/20220/2019 ORDER

8. The authorities will release the applicants 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.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is
permitted.

(A.Y. KOGJE, J)
Siddharth

Page 4 of 4

Downloaded on : Fri Nov 22 02:44:50 IST 2019

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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