Nitinbhai Ravjibhai @ Ravibhai Mucchadiya vs Shirish Jamnadas Fudhanwala

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.11208056220072/2023 registered with the Thorala Police Station, Rajkot City for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 323, 504, 120(B), 143, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.

Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the so-called incident has taken place on 01.02.2023 and on the very next day i.e. on 02.02.2023, FIR has been lodged and on the very next day i.e. on 03.02.2023, the applicant has been arrested and since then, he is in judicial custody. Learned advocate submitted that now the investigation is completed and after submission of the chargesheet, the present application is preferred. Learned advocate submitted that as per the case of the prosecution, so far as the role of the present applicant is concerned, he has caught hold of the deceased at the time of commission of crime and at the most, giving kick and fist blows, however except this, there is no other role attributed to him and the said fact is supported the investigation papers collecting during the course of investigation. It is, therefore, urged that considering the role attributed to the applicant – accused at the time of commission of crime, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

Learned APP for the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. It is submitted that the role of the present applicant is clearly spelt out from the papers of the chargesheet and, hence, the present application may not be entertained.

Learned advocate appearing for the original complainant has also opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the present applicant is involved in the commission of crime right from the beginning and he is one of the conspirators. Learned advocate submitted that as per the well designed plan, all the accused have reached at a particular place, where the deceased was beaten by all the accused, however, the deceased escaped from the clutches of the accused and ran away from the said place, however, the accused have chased the deceased in a car and, thereafter, the deceased was caught hold by the applicant – accused and other accused, whereas the main accused and other persons have inflicted blows upon the vital part of the body of the deceased, resultantly, the deceased succumbed to the injuries. Learned advocate submitted that had the present applicant not caught hold of the deceased, in that event, the deceased would have been alive but the present applicant has become instrumental to provide an opportunity to the main accused to inflict the blows by catching hold the deceased. Learned advocate submitted that the role of the present applicant at the time of commission of crime clearly goes on to show his active involvement and participation in the commission of crime. Learned advocate has also submitted that the applicant is having past antecedents and, hence if this Court may exercise the discretion in his favour then, there is possibility of indulging into such offence again and if this Hon’ble Court may exercise the discretion in his favour then, strictest condition may be imposed upon him. Learned advocate has put reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Nitu Kumar Vs. Gulveer & Anr., reported in (2022) 9 SCC 222 and submitted that the bail application of the applicant may be rejected.

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.

It is found out from the record that the present application is preferred after submission of the chargesheet and now the investigation is completed and the applicant is in jail since 03.02.2023. It is found out from the compilation of the chargesheet papers that the applicant – accused has caught hold of the deceased at the time of commission of crime, at that time, the main accused had inflicted blow to the deceased and except the said role, there is no other role attributed to him. Therefore considering the above factual aspects and the role played by him at the time of commission of crime, the present application deserves to be allowed.

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 as well as in case of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51.

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. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11208056220072/2023 registered with the Thorala 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;

[g] shall not enter into Rajkot City till conclusion of the trial, except for marking presence as also for attending court proceedings;

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 concerned 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.