TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Gujarat HC grants bail under CrPC Section 439 for IPC offenses, citing prolonged custody and investigation cooperation</h1> The Gujarat HC granted regular bail to the applicants under Section 439 of CrPC for offenses under IPC. The Court considered factors such as prolonged ... Grant of Regular Bail - applicant has submitted that the allegations made against the applicant are vague and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence - HELD THAT:- In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature and gravity of accusation made against the applicants in the FIR, this Court is of the view that discretion is required to be exercised in favour of the applicants for grant of bail. Moreover, the applicants assure that they 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 applicants. The investigation is going on and the charge-sheet is not filed and the trial would take a considerable long period of time. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail on executing personal bond of ₹ 10,000/- each with two surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that they shall - Application allowed. Issues: Regular bail application under Section 439 of CrPC for offenses under IPC, 1860.Analysis:1. Arguments by Applicant: The applicant sought regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The advocate argued that the allegations were vague, the applicant was falsely implicated, and had been in custody since 18.08.2020. It was emphasized that the case relied on documentary evidence, collected documents, and the delay in filing the FIR after 5 years lacked a satisfactory explanation. Additionally, the applicant had no criminal antecedents.2. Opposition by Respondent: The learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed the grant of regular bail citing the nature and gravity of the offenses.3. Court's Considerations: After hearing both parties and perusing the papers, the Court considered various aspects. These included the applicant's prolonged custody, ongoing investigation without a charge sheet, delay in lodging the FIR despite prior awareness by the complainant, and the absence of criminal antecedents. Reference was made to the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, [2012] 1 SCC 40.4. Grant of Bail: The Court exercised discretion in favor of the applicants for granting bail, considering the nature and gravity of the accusations. The applicants assured compliance with any imposed terms and conditions, committing not to breach them. The Court refrained from delving into the merits of the case, noting the ongoing investigation and the expected lengthy trial duration.5. Bail Conditions: The applicants were ordered to be released on regular bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Specific conditions were imposed, including not misusing liberty, cooperating with the investigation, surrendering passports, marking monthly presence at the Police Station, and seeking permission before leaving Gujarat.6. Further Instructions: The Court directed the authorities to release the applicants unless required for other offenses. Any breach of the conditions empowered the Sessions Judge to take appropriate action. The bail bond was to be executed before the lower Court, which could modify or relax the conditions as per the law.7. Trial Proceedings: The trial Court was instructed not to be influenced by the preliminary observations made by the High Court while granting bail. The application was allowed, and the Registry was directed to inform the jail authority and Sessions Court about the order. The applicant's advocate was also permitted to transmit the order through suitable electronic means.This detailed analysis encapsulates the legal proceedings and considerations leading to the grant of regular bail in the mentioned case before the Gujarat High Court.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
