R/CR.MA/25564/2024 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 25564 of 2024 ========================================================== NAIMISH VINODRAI KATHRANI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR PRATIK Y JASANI(5325) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 27/06/2025 ORAL ORDER [1.0] RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State. [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. I - 377 of 2002 registered with Bhaktinagar Police Station, Rajkot, for the offence under Sections 463, 465, 464, 467, 468, 471, 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. [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. Applicant is in jail since 29.09.2024. Nothing is required to be recovered from the applicant. Allegation transaction took place in connection with power of attorney of deceased Devendrabhai Parikh. The applicant has not played any role in obtaining loan from the bank and whatever the loan amount has already been paid. Case is based on documentary evidence. The applicant is ready and willing to comply with the terms and conditions deem fit by this Court. Considering the same, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. [4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed R/CR.MA/25564/2024 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 the present application and submitted that, the alleged offence took place in the year 2002 and present applicant remained absconded for 22 years. Nontheless, the applicant had played active role in forging the documents and co-accused are enlarged on bail and loan amount is paid, is not a ground to allow the bail. Considering the conduct of the applicant, possibility cannot be ruled out to jump the trial. Therefore, application does not deserve any consideration. [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 29.09.2024. (3) There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant; (4) The applicant has no past antecedent. (5) Allegation is that, the accused in connivance with each other forged power of attorney of Devendrabhai Parikh and mortgaged the property to the bank and obtained loan of Rs.3.90 lacs. In this regard, complaint has been registered. Accused Nos.2 and 3 arrested in the year 2021 and applicant has been arrested on 29.09.2024. But now chargesheet has R/CR.MA/25564/2024 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 been filed and case is based on documentary evidence, further custody of the applicant would not require. (6) Offence is triable by JMFC Court. (7) Trial would take long time. (8) Considering the apprehension raised by ld. APP about flight risk, stringent conditions are required to be imposed. [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. I - 377 of 2002 registered with Bhaktinagar Police Station, Rajkot, on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one solvent 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; (c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week; R/CR.MA/25564/2024 ORDER DATED: 27/06/2025 (d) not to leave 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; (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. [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 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 27/06/2025 15:57:58