Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1068 (GUJ)

Rajubhai Babbhai Khachar v. State of Gujarat

2019-10-25

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 appellants-original accused for enlarging the appellants on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. I-21 of 2019 registered with Bamanbor Police Station, Surendranagar for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 323, 324, 114, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Sections 3(1)(R)(S), 3(2)(5) and 3(2)(5)(a) of the Atrocity Act. 2. Heard Mr. Dipen Dave, learned advocate for the appellants and Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for respondent no. 1-State and Mr. Prashant Mankad, learned advocate for respondent no. 2-complainant. 3. It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellants that the appellants are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence. That the appellants are poor farmers and they have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. That the complainant has alleged in the FIR that both the accused have assaulted on him and there is no particular overt-act mentioned in the FIR qua appellants. That the complainant has been discharged from the hospital and he is doing his regular work. That initially, the complainant had not made allegations under the Atrocity Act. That the Investigation Officer has not conducted any T.I. Parade before the Executive Magistrate for identifying another unknown shown in the FIR. It is further submitted that no serious role was played by present appellants and therefore, considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the appellants, the appellants may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. It is requested by learned advocate for the appellants to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 20.09.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 839 of 2019 rejecting the prayer for releasing them on bail and to allow this appeal granting regular bail. 4. Per contra, Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for the respondent-State as well as Mr. Prashant Mankad, learned advocate for respondent no. 2, have strongly objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellants and submitted that the injury was caused by deadly weapon which was recovered. 4. Per contra, Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for the respondent-State as well as Mr. Prashant Mankad, learned advocate for respondent no. 2, have strongly objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellants and submitted that the injury was caused by deadly weapon which was recovered. That prima facie involvement of all the appellants are established by the prosecution from the police papers after collecting the evidence during the course of investigation. That serious injury was caused to the complainant. That the complainant was intentionally insulted or intimidated by the accused with intent to humiliate in a place within public view. Therefore, no lenient view can be taken by this Court. If they would be released on bail, they may cause injuries to the complainant and his family. Hence, it is requested by them to dismiss the appeal. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of present case and submissions made by learned advocates for the respective parties, it appears from the injury certificate that no injury was caused to the complainant by present appellants. The injury shown in the certificate was redness as well as swallow on different parts of the body. The appellants are in judicial custody since 04.07.2019. Considering the nature and gravity of assertion made against the appellants and in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made against the appellants in the First Information Report as well as considering the role of present appellants in the alleged offence, the Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of present appellants and to enlarge them on regular bail. 6. Therefore, present appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 20.09.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 839 of 2019 by the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge), Surendranagar is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellants are ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No. I-21 of 2019 registered with Bamanbor Police Station, Surendranagar on their executing personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that they shall;. The appellants are ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No. I-21 of 2019 registered with Bamanbor Police Station, Surendranagar on their executing personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned 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 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 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 permission of this Court; 7. The authorities will release the appellants 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. 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 appellants on bail. 10. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Direct Service is permitted.