Nareshbhai Rameshbhai Waland vs State Of Gujarat

A.S. Supehia, J

Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties through video conferencing.

This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with FIR

registered as C.R.No.11196002200168 of 2020 with Bapod Police Station, District Vadodara for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 306,

323 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the allegations made against the applicant are vague and he has been falsely implicated in the

alleged offence. He has further submitted that the applicant has been arrested on 01.03.2020 and has been incarcerated since then. He has submitted

that the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC is one of the abetments of the commission by any person, predicating existence of a live link

or nexus between two abetments being the propelling causative factor. To constitute abetment the intention and involvement wold militate against the

indictment. Remoteness of the culpable acts or omission in the intention of the accused to actualize the suicide would fall short as well of the offence

of abetment essential to attract the punitive mandate of section 306 of the IPC. Contiguity, continuity, culpability, and complicity of the indictable acts

or omission are concomitant indices of abetment. Section 306 of the IPC thus criminalizes the sustained incitement for suicide. He has submitted that

this extract is taken in the case of Gurucharan Singh V/s. The State of Punjab, 2017 (1) SCC 433 t,herefore, by appreciating the content of FIR no

such act or verbal taunt was done/used by the applicant to instigate the deceased to take drastic steps.

Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was not present at the place of occurrence when the deceased committed

suicide. He has also submitted that another co-accused viz. Jatin Rameshbhai Bhatiya has been released on regular bail by Sessions Judge, Vadodara

in Criminal Misc. Application No.1142 of 2020.

Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant had earlier preferred the bail application being Criminal Misc. Application

No.623 of 2020, wherein the trial court has observed in the order dated 17.03.2020 in para no.5 that in the suicide note brother-in-law has stated that

“you die we are least concernâ€. It is further submitted that another co-accused viz. Jayshreeben, who is having allegation of keeping illicit

relationship with the applicant, has already been released on bail under the provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in

Criminal Misc. Application No.5572 of 2020 by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. He has submitted that same evidence, which is against

Jayshreeben, was there is against the present applicant. Thus, he has submitted that on the ground of parity, the present application may be allowed.

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. Learned APP, while referring to the statement of the mother as well as the family members of the deceased has

submitted that the applicant was having an affair with one Jayshreeben and also on the day of the incident, she was subjected to assault by the

applicant and hence, looking to the constant harassment meted out to her, she has committed suicide. Thus, she has submitted that the present

application may not be allowed.

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

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

i) The applicant is in custody since 01.03.2020;

ii) The investigation is concluded and charge-sheet is filled;

iii) The co-accused viz.Jatin Rameshbhai Bhatiya has been released on regular bail by the trial court;

iv) The co-accused Jayshreeben has been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court.

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, [2012]

1 SCC 40.

Having regard to the above submissions and in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature and gravity of accusation made

against the applicant in the FIR, this Court is of the view that discretion is required to be exercised in favour of the applicant for grant of bail and, since

there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence as charge-sheet is already submitted. Moreover, the applicant assures that he will abide by the

terms and conditions that may be imposed by the Court and shall not commit any breach.

Further I do not intend to go into the merits of the matters and I am persuaded to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant. The

investigation is over and the charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial would take a considerable long period of time.

Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R.No.11196002200168 of

2020 with Bapod Police Station, District Vadodara on executing personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with one surety of 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 & 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(s), 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 his 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;

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.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Registry is directed to intimate the concerned jail authority and the concerned Sessions Court about the present order by sending a copy of this

order through Fax message, email and/or any other suitable electronic mode.

Learned advocate for the applicant is also permitted to send a copy of this order to the concerned jail authority and the concerned Sessions Court

through Fax message, email and/or any other suitable electronic mode.