Gujarat High Court
Jayesh @ Rahul Sureshbhai Madhuji ... vs State Of Gujarat on 1 February, 2022
Bench: B.N. Karia
R/CR.A/2024/2021 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2024 of 2021
==========================================================
JAYESH @ RAHUL SURESHBHAI MADHUJI THAKORE
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MEHUL A SURATI(7870) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS 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 : 01/02/2022
ORAL ORDER
Cause list shows that notice was duly served to the respondent
No.2. Though, today when the matter was called out, nobody is
appeared to contest this appeal. Appellant has filed affidavit of
serving notice to the respondent No.2.
The appellant preferred Criminal Misc. Application No. 7685
of 2021 before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Court No.15, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad u/s. 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 requesting to enlarge the
appellant on regular bail on account of offence being registered vide
I-C.R. No.11191004211264 of 2021 with Amraiwadi Police
Station, Ahmedabad City for the offence punishable u/s. 363, 366,
354(a) of IPC and u/s. 7,8, 18, of POCSO Act as well as Section
3(2)(5), 3(1)(W)(i) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
(Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (for short "the Atrocities Act"),
wherein, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, rejected the said
application on 25.10.2021.
R/CR.A/2024/2021 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2022
Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred
present appeal u/s 14A of the Atrocities Act.
Heard Mr. Mehul Surati, learned advocate for the appellant
and Mr.Hardik Soni, learned APP for the respondent-State.
Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that
appellant is totally innocent person and is falsely implicated in the
commission of the alleged incident. That, looking to the complaint it
is very clear that the victim girl herself left her house and then on the
next date she returned back and the appellant has not abducted the
victim girl. That, there is no any antecedents against the present
appellant. That, the appellant and the victim are of the tender age
and as per the Medical Certificate nothing happened even in the
medical history and therefore, also indulgence of this Court is prayed
for. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the appellant to
quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court,
Ahmedabad and release the appellant on bail.
Learned APP for the respondent-State has vehemently
opposed the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant
and argued that appellant is clearly involved in the offence as the
the victim girl was minor and she was kidnapped from the lawful
guardianship and without her consent. That, case of kidnapping of
minor from her lawful guardianship is clearly established by the
prosecution. Referring the statement of the victim, it is stated that
outreach of her modesty was made by the present appellant, as per
statement of the victim herself. That, trial Court has rightly
dismissed the prayer for releasing the appellant on bail and therefore,
R/CR.A/2024/2021 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2022
appellant is prima facie involved in the serious offence. The age of
the victim is 16 years and it was requested by learned APP for the
respondent-State to dismiss the present appeal.
Having heard learned advocate for the appellant as well
learned APP for the respondent-State and perused the record, it
appears that this complaint was filed by the maternal uncle of the
victim on 24th July, 2021. It also appears that the age of the victim is
15 years, 5 months and 20 days at the time of committing the
offence. Birth Certificate was also produced by the complainant. It
appears that after completing the investigation, charge-sheet was
filed against the present appellant. It also appears that appellant is in
judicial custody since 28th July, 2021. If we consider the history
given by the victim before the doctor at Annexure "E", it is clearly
stated that there was no physical relationship by her with the present
appellant. With her consent, she had run away with the present
appellant. Whatever the allegations of outreach modesty, was with
her consent as per her statement. As per the medical certificate, there
was no external mark of injuries over the body/private part or the
clothes as well as no stains. Considering the peculiar facts of
present the case and the age of the present appellant as 20 years, the
prayer made by the appellant requires for consideration.
In the result, present Criminal Appeal is allowed and the
impugned judgment and order dated 25.10.2021 passed in Criminal
Misc. Application No. 7685 of 2021 by learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Court No.15, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad 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
R/CR.A/2024/2021 ORDER DATED: 01/02/2022
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 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 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. Notice is discharged.
Registry shall communicate this order to the concerned
Sessions Court as well as concerned jail authorities.
(B.N. KARIA, J)
BEENA SHAH
