Allowed

Thakor Sandipkumar Ratansinh v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC30 Mar 2021CR.MA/444/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an application for regular bail under Section 439 CrPC for an 18-year-old applicant accused of offences under the IPC and POCSO Act. Considering the victim statement indicating a love affair, the applicant's age, in-custody period, and completion of investigation, the Court exercised discretion to grant bail subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant ordered to be released on regular bail on execution of personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with one surety and stringent conditions.

Thakor Sandipkumar Ratansinh Vs State of Gujarat — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

R/CR.MA/444/2021 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 444 of 2021

¶4

========================================================== THAKOR SANDIPKUMAR RATANSINH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

¶5

==========================================================

¶6

Appearance:

¶7

VISHAL K ANANDJIWALA(7798) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR RONAK RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶8

==========================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI

¶10

Date : 30/03/2021

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

Heard learned advocate Mr.Vishal K. Anandjiwala for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Ronak Raval for the respondent – State through video conference.

¶13

By this application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant is seeking release on regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.No.11187002201044 of 2020 registered with Balasinor Police Station, District Mahisagar punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) (j) (n) and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 11 of the POCSO Act.

¶14

Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that, the applicant is not involved in commission of offence as alleged in the FIR and therefore, looking to the role of the applicant and nature of the allegations, the applicant is required to be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

R/CR.MA/444/2021 ORDER

¶17

On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the respondent – State vehemently submits that, the offences which have been charged are serious in nature affecting the society at large and looking to the facts as well as the allegations made against the applicant, no discretion would be required to be exercised.

¶18

In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations, this Court is of the opinion that, discretion is required to be exercised to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. This Court has considered the following facts while exercising discretion in favour of the applicant :-

¶19

(i) the applicant is in jail since 02.11.2020;

¶20

(ii) the investigation is over and the charge-sheet is filed;

¶21

(iii) it can be seen from the statement of the victim that there was love affair between the victim and the present applicant;

¶22

(iv) the age of the applicant is only 18 years and there are no past antecedents attributed to the applicant.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid facts, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court, prima facie, is of the opinion that, this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence, present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

R/CR.MA/444/2021 ORDER

¶26

being C.R.No.11187002201044 of 2020 registered with Balasinor Police Station, District Mahisagar on executing personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

¶27

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

¶28

[b] not act in a manner injuries to the interest of the prosecution;

¶29

[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

¶30

[d] not leave India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

¶31

[e] furnish latest 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 the trial Court;

¶32

[f] mark his presence before the concerned police station in the first week of every month till the trial is over;

¶33

[g] shall not enter into local limits of Taluka:Balasinor for a period of three months from the date of his release.

¶34

The Authorities will release the applicant only if the applicant 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. Bail bond to be executed before the learned 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,

¶35

Page 3 of 4

¶36

R/CR.MA/444/2021 ORDER

¶37

learned 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.

¶38

Registry to send a copy of this order to the concerned advocate, the Jail Authority as well as learned Sessions Court forthwith through fax and through e-mail also.

¶39

(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)

¶40

MISHRA AMIT V.

¶41

Page 4 of 4

Thakor Sandipkumar Ratansinh v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thakor Sandipkumar Ratansinh v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maheshbhai Popatbhai Bharodiya Vs Surat Municipal Corporation

Amrutbhai Shivabhai Darji Vs State of Gujarat

Kamleshbhai Revabhai Solanki Vs District Development Officer

Ramubhai Bhikhabhai Solanki Vs State of Gujarat

Gopalbhai Mangalbhai @ Dhulabhai Talpada Vs State of Gujarat

Bharatkumar Ratilal Modi Vs State of Gujarat