Gujarat High Court
Maheshbhai Bakorbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 27 April, 2022
Bench: B.N. Karia
R/CR.A/506/2022 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 506 of 2022
==========================================================
MAHESHBHAI BAKORBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PARVEZ A PATHAN(10862) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK SONI, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
Date : 27/04/2022
ORAL ORDER
Today, learned APP for the respondent no.1-State has
produced a report dated 20.03.2022 under the signature of
Incharge Assistant Superintendent of Police, Jambusar Division,
Jambusar, which is taken on record.
Present appellant has filed Criminal Misc. Application
No. 122 of 2022 before the court of learned Special Judge
(POCSO) and 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch u/s 439
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 requesting to enlarge
him on regular bail on account of offence being C.R. No.
11199027220046 of 2022 registered with Jambusar Police
Station, Dist: Bharuch for the offence punishable under
Sections 354-A, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code; Section 12 of
the POCSO Act and Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(I), 5 of the
R/CR.A/506/2022 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2022
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity)
Act, 1989 (for short "the Atrocities Act") , wherein the learned
learned Special Judge (POCSO) and 3rd Additional Sessions
Judge, Bharuch rejected the said application on 05.02.2022.
Feeling aggrieved by the said order, appellant has
preferred this appeal u/s 14A of the Atrocities Act.
Heard learned advocate for the appellant and learned APP
for the respondent No.1-State.
Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the
present appellant is wrongly involved in the offence by the
Investigating Agency. That, the appellant is absolutely innocent
person and has not committed any offences whatsoever much
less offences as enumerated in the FIR. That, there is no
corroborative evidence against the appellant as alleged against
him. That, entire case is sought to be built up on
circumstantial evidence. That, the impugned FIR is loded
merely to seek revenge against the appellant. That, considering
the age, appellant has not committed the alleged offence. That,
there was a trivial altercation between the appellant and the
complainant with regard to the payment of fees which resulted
into heated arguments between the appellant and complainant
and merely because to take revenge and wreak havoc on the
appellant, present complaint has been filed by the
complainant. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for
R/CR.A/506/2022 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2022
the appellant to quash and set aside the impugned judgment
and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and
release the present appellant on regular bail.
Learned APP for the respondent-State has strongly
objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the
appellant and submitted that learned trial court has rightly
dismissed the prayer for granting bail to the present appellant.
That, the offence against the present appellant has been
established by the prosecution. That, the appellant is involved
in the serious offence thus, no liberty can be granted in favour
of the appellant in releasing him on regular bail. Hence, it was
requested by learned APP for the respondent No.1 State to
dismiss the present appeal.
Report dated 04.03.2022 under the signature of 5 th
Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch speaks about serving notice
to the respondent no.2. The notice has been duly served to the
respondent no.2, though today when the matter was called,
respondent no.2 was not present. Thus, no arguments are
advanced for and on behalf of the respondent no.2.
Having considered the facts of the case, submissions
made by learned advocate for the appellant and learned APP
for the respondent-State as well as documents produced on
record, it appears that the appellant was the driver of the
motor vehicle when the incident was taken palce as alleged in
R/CR.A/506/2022 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2022
the complaint. Considering the seriousness of the offence as
per the complaint and appellant is a driver by profession, there
is no likelihood to tamper with the evidence evidence of the
prosecution or flee away. It appears that the custody of the
present appellant would not be required till the conclusion of
the trial, as the charge sheet has been filed by the investigating
agency before the trial court.
Considering the peculiar facts of the present case, this
Court is of the view to exercise the discretion in favour of the
present appellant by releasing him on regular bail and present
appeal deserves consideration.
In the result, present Criminal Appeal is allowed and the
impugned judgment and order dated 05.02.2022 passed by the
learned Special Judge (POCSO) and 3rd Additional Sessions
Judge, Bharuch in Criminal Misc. Application No. 122 of
2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant is ordered
to be enlarged on regular bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.
10,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of
the trial Court and subject to the conditions that appellant
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
R/CR.A/506/2022 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2022
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;
[f] not enter into village Uber (Taluka Jambusar,
District: Bharuch) for the period of four months
from the date of passing of this order.
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. 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.
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
