SURENDRASING JITENDRASING Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

(2.) The present successive application is filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.A-11210002220107 of 2022 registered with the Sachin GIDC Police Station, Surat of the offence punishable under Ss. 304, 336, 337, 338, 284, 277, 278, 120(b), 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Sec. 15 of the Environment Protection Act.

(3.) Learned advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that the applicant-accused was arrested on 15/1/2022 and since then he is in jail. Learned advocate for the applicant has also submitted that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has also been filed. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that this is a second round of litigation as the earlier application filed by the applicant-accused was permitted to be withdrawn vide order dtd. 6/11/2023 by this very Court with a liberty to again approach this Court if trial would go beyond 12 months. It is moreso submitted that since then, it has been almost eleven months that the applicant-accused has to approach this Court as the trial is still on, and looking to the number of witnesses cited and the voluminous record of the case, the conclusion of trial is likely to take long time, and as such, putting the applicant-accused behind the bar for such an indefinite period, would be nothing but a pre-trial conviction. Moreover, during the interregnum period, the other two co-accused persons seemingly having attributed with graver role than that of the applicant-accused, under whose instructions the applicant- accused has acted, have already been enlarged on bail by this very Court as well as by the trial court. Learned advocate for the applicant has also submitted that the applicant-accused is a driver by profession, and by doing so, he is earning his livelihoods. He was not the owner of the vehicle or the hazardous article. He had acted under the instructions of the other co-accused who are now at large. It is also submitted that the applicant-accused is in jail since 15/1/2022, i.e., for more than two and half years and, therefore, considering the period of incarceration already undergone by the applicant- accused, he may also be set at liberty subject to certain terms and conditions. Lastly, it is submitted that some of the co- accused persons have preferred discharge applications, which are at the stage of final adjudication, and whatever may be the final outcome of those applications, there are all probabilities that the same would go further before the higher forum from either side, which may also prolong the trial. Under the circumstances, learned advocate for the applicant prays that the applicant may be enlarged on bail on any suitable terms and conditions.