75 year old accused under Sections 468, 469, 471, 194, 211, and 120B of the IPC granted bail due to evidence being entirely documentary and old age – Gujarat high court

TITLE: Raman Sreekumar v State of Gujarat

Decided On-: 04/08/2023

21621 of 2022

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. Ilesh vora

INTRODUCTION- The applicant-accused seeks regular bail in connection with a FIR that relates to offences punishable under Sections 468, 469, 471, 194, 211, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code by this subsequent bail application submitted under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.


The Special Investigating Team (SIT) was established by the Gujarat Government following the 2002 riots in the Gujarat Region. After SIT submitted its closure report to the Magisterial Court, it was contested by filing a Criminal Revision Application with the High Court of Gujarat.

Gujarat, and upon confirmation of the learned court’s ruling, the same was rejected.Against which, Special Magistrate an application for leave was submitted to the Supreme Court. Dismissing the Special Leave Petition

the Supreme Court on In accordance withthe aforementioned observations made by the Supreme CourtA FIR was filed against one Sanjiv Bhatt,

The applicant in this case, R.B. Shreekumar, and Ms.Setalvad Teesta.

According to the prosecution, the accused and others conspired to abuse the legal system by creating false evidence to convict multiple defendants of crimes punishable by the death penalty. By doing so, they violated Section 194 of the Indian Penal Code. Further allegations include that the accused filed false and malicious criminal charges against innocent people with the intent to harm them and had prepared false records in order to carry out the alleged conspiracy.  The applicant was taken into custody


The applicant’s knowledgeable attorney has stated that the accused, Ms. Teesta Setalvad, has been considered and granted bail by the Apex Court. The Apex Court noted that, while granting the bail, the entire prosecution case is based on documentary evidence, and that evidence is in the custody of the Investigating Agency. Therefore, taking into account the filing of the chargesheet, she is entitled to the bail. He would also argue that the applicant is a retired IPS officer who is currently around 75 years old and has age-related illnesses. He would also contend that the applicant has complied with the terms of the interim bail and that nothing has occurred during that time, so keeping the applicant in custody would be ineffective since further custody is not required and the trial would take a long time.

In contrast, the learned Public Prosecutor has argued against Mr. Mitesh Amin’s assertions that the applicant is guilty of the alleged crime and that there is prima-facie evidence against him. As a result, the court is unable to exercise its discretion regarding the applicant’s role in this case or the evidence used to prove the charge.

This Court believes that the case is entirely supported by documentary evidence, which is currently in the custody of the investigating agency. The applicant, who is around 75 years old and has age-related illnesses, has no allegations that he abused his freedom during the interim bail

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by-  Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgement-


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *