High CourtsSingle Bench

Krishnakumar @ Kishan Singasanbhai Kusvaha vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court · Decided on 9 May 2024 · Citation: (2024) 05 GUJ CK 0016

HON’BLE JUDGES
Divyesh A. Joshi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 114, 120(B), 170, 323, 365, 384, 419 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 66(C)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
R/Criminal Misc.Application (For Successive Regular Bail - After Chargesheet) No. 8337 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

24 paragraphs · 998 words

Divyesh A. Joshi, J

1.

Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

2.

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.11208002240082 of 2024 registered with the Ajidem Police Station, Rajkot City, for the offence punishable under Sections 365, 384, 120(B), 419, 170, 323 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section-66(C) of the IT Act.

3.

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the present application is preferred after submission of charge-sheet. Learned advocate for the applicant has also submitted that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has also been filed.

Learned advocate submitted that the so-called incident has taken place for the period between 17.01.2024 to 02.02.2024, for which the FIR has been lodged on 08.02.2024. Learned advocate submitted that the FIR has been filed against total 03 accused persons and the applicant is shown at sr.no.2. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that all the offences are exclusively triable by the court of Magistrate. Learned advocate further submits that the investigation is already concluded and whatever documents upon which the reliance has been placed by the prosecuting agency, have already been collected by the IO during the course of investigation. Therefore, there is no chance to tamper with the documents. Learned advocate further submits that the brother of the applicant also undertakes before this Hon’ble Court that as soon as the applicant – accused would be enlarged on bail, immediately within a period of one week, the applicant-accused will deposit an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only) before the concerned trial Court and an undertaking to that effect will be filed before the competent court also. Under the circumstances, learned advocate for the applicant prays that considering the role attributed to the applicant-accused, the applicant may be enlarged on bail on any suitable terms and conditions.

4.

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. It is submitted that the specific role of the present applicant is clearly spelt out from the papers of charge-sheet. Learned APP has submitted that 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.

5.

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

6.

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 the following aspects;

a) That the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has also been filed;

b) That all the offences are exclusively triable by the court of Magistrate;

c) That the documents upon which reliance has been placed by the prosecuting agency, have already been collected by the IO during the course of investigation;

d) That the brother of the applicant undertakes before this Hon’ble Court that as soon as the applicant – accused would be enlarged on bail, immediately within a period of one week, the applicant-accused will deposit an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakh Only) before the concerned trial Court and shall also file an undertaking reiterating the facts as narrated in the undertaking filed before this Court.

7.

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.

8.

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.

9.

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.11208002240082 of 2024 registered with the Ajidem Police Station, Rajkot City, 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;

10.

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.

11.

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.