Gujarat High Court
Shanni @ Sonya Bapu Ratan Patil vs State Of Gujarat on 2 February, 2022
Bench: B.N. Karia
R/CR.A/847/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 847 of 2021
==========================================================
SHANNI @ SONYA BAPU RATAN PATIL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BC DAVE(245) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK A DAVE(3764) 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 : 02/02/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. The appellant preferred one Criminal Misc. Application No.
2817 of 2021 before the Court of learned 9th Additional Sessions
Judge, Surat 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 C.R. No.11210056201449 of 2020
with Dindoli Police Station, Surat for the offence punishable
Sections 302, 395, 324, 326, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 269, 120(b),
201 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s. 3(2)(5) and 3(2)(5-A)
of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity)
Act, 1989 (for short "the Atrocities Act"), Section 3 of the Epidemic
Disease Act as well as Section 135(1) of Gujarat Police Act
R/CR.A/847/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2022
wherein, the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat rejected
the said application on 28.05.2021
2. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred
present appeal u/s 14A of the Atrocities Act.
3. Heard learned advocate for the appellant, learned advocate
appearing for the respondent No.2 and learned APP for the
respondent-State.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that
investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. Looking to the case
papers, there is no prima facie case against the present appellant.
That learned Judge ought to have seen that the provisions of the
Atrocities Act would not be applicable so far as the facts of the case.
That there is no overt act attributed to the present appellant and the
only role attributed to the appellant is remaining present at the scene
of the offence and nothing beyond that. That there is no recovery or
discovery from the appellant. That appellant has no mens rea or
intention to cause death of the deceased and police has wrongly
arrested the present appellant. That present appellant has no criminal
antecedents. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the
appellant to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order
R/CR.A/847/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2022
passed by learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in Criminal
Misc. Application No.2817 of 2021 and release the appellant on bail.
5. Learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.2 as well as
learned APP appearing for the respondent-State have strongly
objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant
and submitted that with common object and intention, brutal murder
was committed by hatching criminal conspiracy by the appellant and
other co-accused persons. It is further submitted that from the
statement of the witnesses and the CCTV footage, it is clearly found
that appellant was present at the time of committing the offence by
the accused persons. As per the panchnama produced on record, that
three weapons were recovered by the Investigating Agency during
the course of investigation. That other more weapons were also
recovered by the Investigating Officer. That serious offence is
committed by the present appellant. Hence, it is requested by learned
advocate appearing for the respondent No.2 as well as learned APP
appearing for the respondent-State to dismiss this criminal appeal.
6. Having considered the facts of the case, submissions made by
learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as
learned APP appearing for the respondent-State, it appears that a
R/CR.A/847/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2022
complaint is registered before the Dindoli Police Station, Dist-Surat
being C.R. No.11210056201449 of 2020 for the offence punishable
under Sections 302, 395, 324, 326, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 269,
120(b), 201 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections
3(2)(5) and 3(2)(5-A) of the Atrocities Act, Section 3 of the
Epidemic Disease Act and Section 135(1) of the G.P.Act. It is not in
dispute that charge-sheet is filed by the Investigating Agency against
the accused persons. From the entire charge-sheet papers, it is
nowhere stated by any of the witnesses that any blow was given by
the present appellant to the deceased namely Shankar. From the
charge-sheet papers, it appears that appellant was present. That no
injury was caused by him using any weapon to the deceased. From
the CCTV footage also, it is no where stated or found by the
witnesses namely Sureshbhai Namdev Nikam and Rajeshbhai
Pundlik Vakode that present appellant had caused injury to the
deceased. Mere the appellant was present at the scene of the offence,
his presence would not require any judicial custody till end of the
trial. It also appears that appellant is aged about 20 years old and
there is no criminal history pointed out by the prosecution against
the present appellant.
R/CR.A/847/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2022
7. Considering the role allegedly played by the present appellant
in the alleged offence and his age, prayer made by the present
appellant requires consideration as the charge-sheet is filed and
investigation is over. Hence, this Court is of the view that present
appeal deserves consideration.
8. In the result, present Criminal Appeal is allowed and the
impugned judgment and order dated 28.05.2021 passed by learned
9th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in Criminal Misc. Application
No. 2817 of 2021 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
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;
R/CR.A/847/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2022
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. This order be communicated to the appellant through Jail
Authorities by the registry as well as learned Sessions Court
concerned.
(B.N. KARIA, J)
SUYASH
