Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Bharkesh Surendrakumar Patel Vs. State of Gujarat

Bharkesh Surendrakumar Patel vs State of Gujarat

Type Court Judgment Court Gujarat Decided Jun 06, 2011
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/918513

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Gujarat High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No 7389 of 2011
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) (Cr.P.C) - Section 439; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 328, 384, 385, 120B

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bharkesh Surendrakumar Patel

Advocate MR.DIPAK B PATEL, Adv.

Respondent

State of Gujarat

Advocate MR JK SHAH, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) (Cr.P.C) - Section 439; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 328, 384, 385, 120B

Excerpt

.....extort money from him by showing some of his photographs in company of a girl. it is the case of the prosecution that a stupefying drug was administered to the first informant and thereafter photographs were clicked.5. taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie the say of the first informant does not inspire any confidence and the fir is belated by almost six months and there is no explanation worth the name coming forth as to why the fir was not registered immediately.6. in this view of the matter, i am persuaded to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant, taking into consideration the following aspects:- (a) there are no direct allegations against the accused-applicant, except the fact that he was in company of the main accused. it appears that he has been arraigned as an accused as a co-conspirator. (b) there is a delay of more than six months in filing the fir. the investigation is over and the charge-sheet has been filed. all offences are magistrate triable, except one under section 328 of ipc. 7. in this view of the matter, the accused-applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the offences registered with the deesa city police station being c.r. no.i-23/2011 on his executing a bond in the sum of rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty-five thousand only) with a solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court and subject to the following conditions that he shall:- [a] not take undue advantage of or misuse liberty; [b] maintain law and order and should co-operate with the investigating officer; [c] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution; [d] surrender his passport, if any, to the lower court within a week; [e] not leave the local limits of the state of gujarat without prior permission of the sessions judge concerned; [f] furnish the address of his residence at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior.....

Full Judgment

1. Rule. Mr.Shah, learned APP waives service Rule for the respondent State.

2. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying for regular bail in connection with the offence registered with Deesa City Police Station vide C.R. No.I-23/2011 for the offences punishable under Section 328, 384, 385, read with 120B of IPC.

3. Heard Mr.Dipak Patel, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr.Shah, learned APP for the respondent State.

4. The sum and substance of the case of the prosecution is that the accused-applicant and other co-accused hatched a conspiracy to black-mail the first informant and thereby extort money from him by showing some of his photographs in company of a girl. It is the case of the prosecution that a stupefying drug was administered to the first informant and thereafter photographs were clicked.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie the say of the first informant does not inspire any confidence and the FIR is belated by almost six months and there is no explanation worth the name coming forth as to why the FIR was not registered immediately.

6. In this view of the matter, I am persuaded to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant, taking into consideration the following aspects:-

(a) There are no direct allegations against the accused-applicant, except the fact that he was in company of the main accused. It appears that he has been arraigned as an accused as a co-conspirator.

(b) There is a delay of more than six months in filing the FIR. The investigation is over and the charge-sheet has been filed. All offences are Magistrate triable, except one under Section 328 of IPC.

7. In this view of the matter, the accused-applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the offences registered with the Deesa City Police Station being C.R. No.I-23/2011 on his executing a bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand only) with a solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the following conditions that he shall:-

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

[b] maintain law and order and should co-operate with the investigating officer;

[c] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

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

[e] not leave the local limits of the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

[f] furnish the address of his residence at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court.

[g] not indulge into any such activity.

(h) mark his presence at Deesa City Police Station once in 15 days every Sunday between 10 a.m., to 2 p.m.

8. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being.

9. 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. Bail bond to be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try the case.

11. It goes without saying that any observations touching the merits of the case is purely for the purpose of deciding the question of grant of bail and shall not be construed as an expression of the final opinion in the main matter.

12. This application is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute. D.S. Permitted.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial