IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 18117 of 2025 ========================================================== RAJESH SHIVAJI ZANZE Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR. KISHAN H DAIYA(6929) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 16/09/2025 ORAL ORDER [1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State. The complainant – party in person is present in the Court. [2.0] The present successive bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11210007240269/2024 registered with Jahangirpura Police Station, Surat city, for the offence under Sections 307, 325, 323, 294(kh), 506(2) and 201 of the IPC. [3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed. It is alleged in the FIR that, the accused intended to marry with the victim, but upon refusal of the marriage proposal, the accused ran over his tempo on the victim and caused her serious injuries. He has submitted that, the injured is out of danger and discharged from the hospital. Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the hospital. He therefore submits that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on successive regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. p. 1 [4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application and submitted that, the accused with an intention to commit murder, dashed his tempo to the victim, due to which, the victim got serious fractured injuries. Further, there is no change in the circumstances. If he is released on bail, possibility to hamper the witnesses cannot be ruled out. The applicant himself has contributed to delay the trial and belatedly he has engaged an advocate. In such circumstances, present application may not be entertained. [5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered. [6.0] I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects have been considered: (1) Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed; (2) Applicant is in jail since 17.04.2024. (3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant; (4) Obviously commencement and conclusion of trial will take some time. (5) During one year and six months, only 8 witnesses have been p. 2 examined and 26 witnesses are yet to be examined. (6) Injured is out of danger and discharged from hospital. As the applicant dashed his tempo to the victim and caused fractured injuries, offence under Section 307 of IPC has been registered. (7) Applicant has no past antecedent. (8) Expected conclusion date of trial is approximately shown as 8 months. [7.0] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration. [8.0] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, without discussing further on merit, 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 FIR being C.R. No. 11210007240269/2024 registered with Jahangirpura Police Station, Surat city, on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one local 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 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; p. 3 (c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week; (d) not to leave India without prior permission of the Trial Court concerned; (e) mark presence before the concerned police station twice in a month till trial is concluded; (f) furnish the Aadhar card, email ID/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/contact number without prior permission of Trial Court; (g) if the applicant is found to be indulged in any illegal activities in future, the trial Court concerned will be free to issue warrant and cancel the bail granted to the applicant. (h) not directly or indirect try to contact the victim or witnesses connected to the case. (i) not to enter into the vicinity where the victim resides. [9.0] 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. [10.0] 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. [11.0] 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. [12.0] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT p. 4 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: PATEL SUCHIT JAYESHBHAI(HC01083), Private Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/09/2025 13:35:07