Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1024 (GUJ)

Bhoi Jigar v. State of Gujarat

2019-10-22

B.N.KARIA

body2019
ORDER : B.N. Karia, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 14(A) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter be referred to as "the Atrocity Act" for short) at the instance of the appellant- original accused for enlarging the appellant on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. I-119 of 2019 registered with "B" Division Police Station, Mehsana for the offence punishable under Sections 337, 323, 504, 506(2) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Sections 3(1)R, S and 3(2)(5-A) of the Atrocity Act. 2. Heard learned advocate for the appellant and learned APP for respondent-State. Respondent no. 2 is not present when the matter was called out. On previously occasion twice, respondent no. 2 was not present. 3. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that appellant's father Ashokbhai Bhoi (original accused no. 1) and his mother Hansaben Bhoi (original accused no. 2) have been released on bail by the Court-below. It is further submitted that the appellant is a young boy aged about 20 years and is a student studying at Municipal Arts and Urban Science College, Mehsana. It is further submitted that if present appellant is not released on bail, he would not be able to appear in the college exams and his career would be adversely affected. It is further submitted that the complainant has admitted in the FIR that they know each other since last ten years. Had the appellant been of the mindset and attitude as is alleged in the FIR, there would have been instances of tussle before. It is further submitted that this is the first such instance as no other instance has been mentioned by the complainant in his complaint. This shows that the complaint has been filed with a mala fide intention and present appellant is not involved in any such scuffle and has not used any derogatory words towards the complainant. Therefore, present appellant is required to be released on regular bail. 4. Per contra, Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for the respondent-State has strongly objected to grant the bail and has submitted that involvement of present appellant is clearly made out by the prosecution, but she has drawn attention of this Court to the police papers. Therefore, present appellant is required to be released on regular bail. 4. Per contra, Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for the respondent-State has strongly objected to grant the bail and has submitted that involvement of present appellant is clearly made out by the prosecution, but she has drawn attention of this Court to the police papers. It is further submitted that injury certificate of the complainant is also received by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that the statements of the witnesses are recorded by the prosecution, and they have supported the case of the prosecution. That in such a case, the appellant would be released on bail as prima facie involvement as alleged in the offence is proved by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the statement of niece of the complainant viz. Meenaben Chavda was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 19.10.2019, wherein she was informed about this matter and to remain present today by respondent no. 2 before the Court. It is further submitted that as the original complainant was not present, niece of the complainant Meenaben Chavda perused the matter and by undertaking, she informed the Court about the next date is fixed by the Court i.e. on 22.10.2019. However, the niece of the complainant was informed by the police, respondent no. 2 is not present to contest the appeal and affidavit of service is also filed by present appellant serving notice to respondent no. 2 through his niece and signature was obtained. Hence, it is requested by her to dismiss the appeal. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of present case and submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant and learned APP for the respondent-State as well as perusing the police papers, it appears that three accused persons were shown in the complaint and out of three accused persons, two accused persons were released on bail by the Sessions Court at Mehsana. From the injury certificate of the complainant, it appears that there is no serious injury caused to him. On 07.08.2019, he was examined by the doctor and was discharged on the very same day. From the injury certificate of the complainant, it appears that there is no serious injury caused to him. On 07.08.2019, he was examined by the doctor and was discharged on the very same day. Considering the nature and gravity of assertion made against the appellant and in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made against the appellant in the First Information Report, the benefit of parity would be given to present appellant and therefore, the Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the present appellant and to enlarge him on regular bail. 6. Therefore, present appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 27.09.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 1404 of 2019 by the Special Judge (Atrocity), Mehsana is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No. I-119 of 2019 registered with "B" Division Police Station, Mehsana on his executing personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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; (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 on alternate Monday of every English calendar month between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m., for a period of six months or till the conclusion of the trial, whichever is earlier; (f) furnish the present address of his 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 this Court; 7. The authorities will release the appellant only if he 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. 8. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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 appellant on bail. 10. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Direct Service is permitted.