1. Learned Advocate for the applicants does not press the applicants at this stage qua the applicant No.1 - Devda Bhemsing Laxmansing, with a liberty to file afresh after a period of three months. In view of the above, this application stands disposed of as not pressed qua the applicant No.1, with the aforesaid liberty. Rule is discharged qua the applicant No.1 only.
2. This application is filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with FIR registered as C.R. No.I-46/2018 with Panthawada Police Station, Banaskantha for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants submits that considering the nature of offence, the applicants No.2 and 3 Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/2696/2019 ORDER may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.
5. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for a further reasoned order.
6. I have heard the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered qua the applicants No.2 and 3:- I) The First Information Report is registered on 08.12.2018 for the offence which is alleged to have taken place on 07.12.2018; II) The applicants are in custody since 04.01.2019; III) From the investigation papers, it appears that the applicants were only present and are involved in the offence as earlier the same complainant had filed the offences against them; IV) The age of the applicant No.3 is only 19 years and; V) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor under the instructions of the Investigating Officer is unable to bring on record any special circumstances against the applicants.
This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in  1 SCC 40. Page 2 of 4
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicants in the First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicants No.2 and 3 on regular bail.
8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant No.2 - Devda Natvarsing Uksing and applicant No.3 - Devda Jitusing Ramsing are ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No.I-46/2018 with Panthawada Police Station, Banaskantha on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/= (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) EACH with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that they shall;
(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week;
(d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;
(e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station ONCE in a month for a period of six months between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(f) furnish the present address of their 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 Page 3 of 4 R/CR.MA/2696/2019 ORDER permission of this Court;
9. The authorities will release the applicants No.2 and 3 only if they are 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.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.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 applicants No.2 and 3 on bail.
12.The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) CAROLINE Page 4 of 4