Gujarat High Court
Arjan Bhaghu Rabari vs State Of Gujarat on 25 April, 2022
Bench: B.N. Karia
R/CR.A/660/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 660 of 2022
==========================================================
ARJAN BHAGHU RABARI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS AYUSHRI THAKKAR FOR NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for the Appellant(s)
No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
MR. NISARG D SHAH(7299) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MR HARDIK SONI, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
Date : 25/04/2022
ORAL ORDER
Present appellants have filed Criminal Misc. Application
No. 17 of 2022 before the court of learned 7 th Additional
Sessions Judge and Special Judge (Atrocity), Bhachau, Dist:
Kutch u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
requesting to enlarge them on regular bail on account of
offence being C.R. No. 11993004210466 of 2021 registered
with Bhachau Police Station, Dist: Kutch for the offence
punishable under Sections 307, 395, 397, 120(B), 323, 324,
447, 427, 294(B), 506(2), 341 of the Indian Penal Code;
Section 25(1-b)(a) of the Arms Act; Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),
3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a), of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
(Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (for short "the Atrocities
Act") and Section 135 of the GP Act, wherein the learned 7 th
R/CR.A/660/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2022
Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge (Atrocity),
Bhachau, Dist: Kutch rejected the said application on
17.01.2022.
Feeling aggrieved by the said order, appellants have
preferred this appeal u/s 14A of the Atrocities Act.
Heard learned advocate for the appellants; learned
advocate for the respondent no.2 and learned APP for the
respondent No.1-State.
Learned advocate for the appellants has submitted that
the present appellants are wrongly involved in the offence by
the Investigating Agency. That, the appellants are absolutely
innocent persons and have not committed any offences
whatsoever much less offences as enumerated in the FIR. That,
even during the course of investigation, no material has come
on record suggesting that any of the appellants have used their
weapon for causing grievous injury. That, no major overt act
has been attributed to any of them in the complaint or the
subsequent statements which can be said to be directly
relatable to the offence of causing injury. That, in absence of
any specific role having been alleged to have been played by
any of them which can be said to be directly responsible for
causing injury to the complainant and the injured witness.
That, the co-accused have been released on bail by the learned
Sessions Court as well as by this Court. Hence, it was
R/CR.A/660/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2022
requested by learned advocate for the appellants to quash and
set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge and release the present
appellants on regular bail.
Learned APP for the respondent-State has strongly
objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the
appellants and submitted that learned trial court has rightly
dismissed the prayer for granting bail to the present appellants.
That, the offence against the present appellants has been
established by the prosecution. That, the appellants are
involved in the serious offence thus, no liberty can be granted
in favour of the appellants in releasing them on regular bail.
Hence, it was requested by learned APP for the respondent
No.1 State to dismiss the present appeal.
Learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has objected
the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellants
and submitted that the appellant no. 1 had beaten with dhoka;
appellant no.2 had beaten with Pipe; appellant no.3 had beaten
with Lakadi; appellant no.4 had beaten with Lakadi; appellant
no.5 had beaten with Lakadi, appellant no.6 had beaten with
Pipe and appellant no.7 had beaten with Kuhadi to the
respondent no.2 and threaten for dire consequences. The
respondent no.2 was hospitalized for a period between 1 to 9
days and till date, he is taking treatment as an outdoor patient.
R/CR.A/660/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2022
Ultimately, it was submitted by learned advocate for the
respondent no.2 to dismiss present appeal.
Having considered the facts of the case, submissions
made by learned advocate for the appellants; learned advocate
for the respondent no.2 and learned APP for the respondent-
State as well as documents produced on record, it appears that
it is not in dispute that this appeal has been preferred after
filing of the charge sheet as investigating officer has completed
the investigation, which came to be culminated into Special
Atrocities Case No. 60 of 2021. It appears that the appellants
No.1, 2, 3 and 6 came to be arrested on 31.10.2021; appellants
no.4 and 5 came to be arrested on 29.10.2021 and appellant
no. 7 came to be arrested on 02.11.2021 and since then they
are in judicial custody.
If we consider the allegations made in the complaint and
statements of the witnesses, only role attributed to the
appellant no.1 is of being armed with dhoko but is not stated to
have used the weapon and/or caused any injury to any person.
The appellant no.2 is alleged to have caused injury on the back
of the complainant with pipe; while appellants no. 3, 4 and 5
are alleged to have been armed with Lakdi and appellant no.6
is alleged to have been armed with pipe but there are no
allegations that the said appellants have used the weapon and/
or caused any injury to any person weapons; the appellant
R/CR.A/660/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2022
No.7 is alleged to have caused injury on the right leg of
complainant's uncle with back side of axe not from the sharp
end. From the injury certificate produced on record, it cannot
be said that none of the appellants have used the weapon for
causing injury or otherwise have caused any serious injury to
the complainant or the injured witness. It appears that the
injury sustained by the complainant or the injured witness is
not life threatening and both the complainant and injured
witness have been been discharged from the hospital. It
further appears that there is no recovery or discovery of any
incriminating material at the instance of the present appellants
and nothing has been found by the police during the course of
investigation suggesting direct involvement of any of the
appellants in the alleged offence. As Investigation is completed,
basic ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under
Section 3(i)(x) of the Atrocity Act is not satisfied in the facts of
the present case.
It further appears from the record that the complainant
has not alleged in the complaint that present appellants were
not the members of the SC/ST Community and the
complainant was intentionally insulted or intimidated by the
present appellants with intent to humiliate in a place within
public view. In absence of such assertion in the complaint by
the complainant about the appellants not being members of
R/CR.A/660/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2022
scheduled caste or a scheduled tribe and not disclosing
exhibition of any intent, prima facie, appellants are falsely
involved in the offence of Atrocity Act.
It appears from the record that the other co-accused
Kanji alias Kana Sadur Koli, against whom, graver allegations
were made by the prosecutions, was already released on
regular bail by learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge and
Special Judge (Atrocity), Bhachau, Dist: Kutch on 29.03.2022
in Criminal Misc. Application No. 89 of 2022. Another co-
accused Savabhai Valabhai Koli was also released on regular
bail vide order dated 22.02.2022 passed by this Court in
Criminal Appeal No. 2027 of 2021.
It further appears that no grievous injury was caused to
the complainant. That, the injury caused to the complainant or
injured witness is not life threatening and both of them means
the complainant and the injured witness have been discharged
from the Hospital.
Considering the peculiar facts of the present case, this
Court is of the view to exercise the discretion in favour of the
present appellants by releasing them on regular bail and
present appeal deserves consideration.
In the result, present Criminal Appeal is allowed and the
impugned judgment and order dated 17.01.2022 passed by the
learned learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge and Special
R/CR.A/660/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2022
Judge (Atrocity), Bhachau, Dist: Kutch in Criminal Misc.
Application No. 17 of 2022 is hereby quashed and set aside.
The appellants are ordered to be enlarged on regular bail on
furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety of like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the
conditions that appellants 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 India without prior permission of the
concerned Trial Court;
[e] furnish the present address of 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;
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. 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
R/CR.A/660/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/04/2022
relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.
At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the
prima facie observations made by this Court in the present
order.
Direct service is permitted.
(B.N. KARIA, J)
K. S. DARJI
