Jay @ Jacky Rajubhai Jagdev vs State Of Gujarat

Divyesh A. Joshi, J

The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11210047230874 of 2023 registered with the Udhna Police Station, Surat of the offence punishable under Sections 302 read with section 114 of the IPC and Section 135 of the G.P.Act.

Learned advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that the applicant-accused was arrested on 20.04.2023 and since then he is in jail. Learned advocate for the applicant has also submitted that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has also been filed. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the only role attributed to the applicant-accused is that he had caught hold the deceased at the time of the incident and the accused No.1 inflicted blow to the deceased. It is submitted that the applicant-accused did not have any weapon in his hand at the time of the commission of the offence. He has not inflicted any blow to the deceased. It was the accused No.1 who gave knife blow to the deceased on hie neck. It is further submitted that the accused No.1 happens to be the real uncle of the applicant-accused. The deceased was also a cousin brother of the accused No.1 and the distant uncle of the applicant-accused. Learned advocate for the applicant has also submitted that the reason behind occurrence of such incident is that the mother of the applicant-accused and the sister-in-law of the accused No.1 eloped with the deceased and keeping grudge of the same, the accused No.1 hatched the conspiracy to kill the deceased. Learned advocate for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant-accused is a 19 years young boy who might have, under the influence of his uncle, acted upon in the commission of the offence. It is also submitted that the only allegation against the applicant accused is that he had caught hold the deceased. He did not inflicted any blow to the deceased. Even, there is no recovery or discovery at the instance of the applicant-accused. Further, he does not any any past antecedents. Under the circumstances, learned advocate for the applicant prays that on the ground of mercy, the applicant may be enlarged on bail on any stringent terms and conditions.

The learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. Learned APP has submitted that the applicant-accused has actively participated in the commission of the offence which is evident from the CCTV footage wherein both the accused have been clearly seen committing the offence. Therefore, considering the role attributed to the applicant-accused, this is a fit case wherein discretionary power of this Court is not required to be exercised in favour of the applicant-accused.

Learned advocate Mr. Kishan Daiya appearing on behalf of the original complainant has submitted that the entire incident has been recorded in the CCTV camera wherein both the accused have clearly been seen committing the offence. Hence, considering the role attributed to the applicant-accused, this Court should not exercise its discretionary power in favour of the applicant-accused.

The learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.

I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers of the investigation and considered the allegations levelled against the applicant and the role played by the applicant. This Court has also considered that now the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has also been filed. The applicant-accused is a young boy aged about 19 years and he is in jail since 20.04.2023. There is no recovery or discovery of any weapon at the instance of the applicant-accused. The applicant-accused does not have any past antecedents. The applicant-accused had not inflicted any blow to the deceased. Therefore, considering the role attributed to the applicant-accused, I am of the view that the present application deserves consideration.

This Court has also 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.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant 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 and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11210047230874 of 2023 registered with the Udhna Police Station, Surat, on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 injuries 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 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 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;

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 above conditions, in accordance with law.

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. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Direct service is permitted.