Jasvindarsingh Ranjitsingh Saini vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Jasvindarsingh Ranjitsingh Saini vs State Of Gujarat on 7 December, 2023

                                                                                          NEUTRAL CITATION




       R/CR.A/2332/2023                                     ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023

                                                                                           undefined




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 2332 of 2023

==========================================================
                          JASVINDARSINGH RANJITSINGH SAINI
                                       Versus
                                 STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR CHIRAG B AYDI(13146) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MS CM SHAH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

                                   Date : 07/12/2023

                                      ORAL ORDER

Rule. Learned APP waives service for the Respondent-State.

1. By way of the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R. No. 11993007230781 of 2023 with 'B' Division Gandhidham Police Station, District: Kachchh East-Gandhidham, under Sections 323, 324, 294(b), 506(2), 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(S), 3(2)(5-a) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Section 135 of the G.P. Act.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that Page 1 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 07 20:46:16 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2332/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023 undefined considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the petitioner, the petitioner may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions.

3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

4. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the papers.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the appellant for the following reasons : -

(1) From the record, it appears that a minor scuffle took place between both the sides, in connection with the parking of the vehicle. A bare reading of the FIR prima facie reveals that the present FIR is nothing but the counter-blast to the FIR filed by the daughter-in-law of the present petitioners.

(2) None of the victims have received any serious injury and they are all discharged from the hospital.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2332/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023 undefined (3) The petitioners are permanent residents of Gandhidham and therefore, there is no risk of their evading trial.

(4) Relevant and essential ingredients under the Atrocities Act are not attracted on prima facie reading of the documents;

(5) None of the offences alleged in the FIR entail punishment of more than seven years. Thus, in that circumstances, guidelines issued in the case of 'Arnesh Kumar v/s. State of Bihar', reported in (2003 (8) SCC 273, reiterated in the case of 'Md. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand and another', reported in 2023 INSC 660 and pursuant to which, Circular No.C. 2703/81 is issued by this Court shall be followed;

(6) Even, essential ingredients of offence punishable u/s 506(2) of the IPC are also not made out;

(7) Even, after considering what is stated in the FIR alleged to have attracted the offence under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and it does not constitute casteist slur and derogated to a particular caste or said to have Page 3 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 07 20:46:16 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2332/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023 undefined been spoken into public place.

6. In above consideration, the appellant has made out prima facie case to get the anticipatory bail. This Court is conscious that statutory bar is operating while granting anticipatory bail under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. But looking to the above reasons along with prima facie case, nature and gravity of the accusation and severity of the punishment as well as absence of flight-risk character, behaviour, means and position of the accused as well as non-likelihood of the offence being repeated and taking assistance of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of 'Prithviraj Chauhan vs Union of India', reported in (2020) 4 SCC 727, this is a fit case to exercise jurisdiction.

7. Considering the aforesaid aspects and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011) 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. reported in (1980) 2 SCC 665 and also the decision in the case of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, I am inclined to allow the present appeal.

8. In the result, the present petition is allowed by directing that in the event of applicant herein being arrested pursuant to FIR registered as C.R. No. 11993007230781 of 2023 with 'B' Page 4 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 07 20:46:16 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2332/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023 undefined Division Gandhidham Police Station, District: Kachchh East- Gandhidham, the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions that the petitioner :

(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required;

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 13th & 14th December, 2023, between 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m.;

(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;

(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/2332/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023 undefined

(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the concerned trial court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the concerned trial court within a week;

9. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed by the petitioner, the concerned learned Judge will be free to take appropriate action in the matter. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions in accordance with law. At the time of trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while granting the petitioner on bail. Direct service is permitted.

(J. C. DOSHI,J) UMESH/-