Noaman Abdul Sattar Tap vs State Of Gujarat

Divyesh A. Joshi, J

Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.

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.11207076220578/2022 registered with the Vejalpur Police Station, Panchmahal for the offence punishable under Sections 8(2) and 10 of the Preservation of Animal Act, under Section 11(1)(I) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, under Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 119 of the Gujarat Police Act.

Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the so-called incident has taken place on 21.12.2022, for which, the FIR has been lodged on 21.12.2022 and the applicant has been arrested in connection with the same on 16.01.2023 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 Learned advocate submitted that earlier bail application filed by the applicant was withdrawn with a liberty to approach again if the trial does not conclude within 12 months. Learned advocate, however, submitted that the present successive bail application has been filed by the applicant on the ground that the co-accused, who was found available at the place of offence by the members of the raiding party has been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and, hence on the principle of law of parity, the present application has been filed. Learned advocate submitted that it is alleged that the present applicant and other co-accused have fled away from the present applicant. It is, therefore, urged that considering the nature of the offence, the role attributed to the applicant and on the ground of parity, 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 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. 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 16.01.2023. I have considered the role attributed to the present applicant at the time of commission of crime and the role attributed to the co-accused, who has been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore considering the above factual aspects and on the ground of parity, 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.11207076220578/2022 registered with the Vejalpur Police Station, Panchmahal 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 concerned court within a week;

[d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the concerned court;

[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 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.