Dilipbhai Sarangbhai Rajput vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 8431 Guj

Gujarat High Court

Dilipbhai Sarangbhai Rajput vs State Of Gujarat on 6 December, 2023

                                                                                      NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/CR.A/2527/2023                                  ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

                                                                                       undefined




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO.
                       2527 of 2023

==========================================================
                        DILIPBHAI SARANGBHAI RAJPUT
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NC THAKKAR, MS PRIYANKA S SINGAL(10426) , MS ROMA I
FIDELIS(3529) 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 : 06/12/2023

                                   ORAL ORDER

Rule. Learned APP waives service for the Respondent-State. Though served, Respondent No.2 chose not to put in appearance before this Court.

1. By way of the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R. No. 11195050220879 of 2022 with Tharad Police Station, District:

Banaskantha, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 120B, 504, 506(2), 143, 447 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(4), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2527/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

undefined

2. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the petitioners, the petitioners 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 the land in question was purchased from one Bhil Bhikhabhai Khengarbhai in the year 1975. It also appears that the sale agreement was executed on the stamp paper of Rs.3.50/-, but, the same was not registered. However, later on, the same was ratified by the Deputy Collector, as per Annexure-

F to this application, whereby, the present petitioners was directed to pay the amount of

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2527/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

undefined

stamp duty, which was duly paid. It further appears that the proceedings under Section 73AA of the Code were initiated qua the said transaction, as it appeared that the tribal land was sold to a non-tribal person. It, however, appears from the document at Annexure-D to this petition that the said proceedings came to be decided in favour of the present applicant by the concerned Revenue Court, after recording the presence and objections of the first informant. It may be noted that the applicant was also granted NA permission, which was approved by the concerned Collector, as per the document produced as Annexire-I to this petition. Thus, from the above it appears that a civil transaction is being given the colour of an offence. It also appears that the first informant was never in possession of the land in question, but only for the purpose of filing the present FIR, he stated that he is in possession of the disputed land. From a perusal of the documents annexed with the present application, it becomes clear that the present applicant has purchased the land in question and

(1) There is no evidence showing that the appellant has caused any injury to the complainant;

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2527/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

undefined

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

(3) The case is otherwise for offence punishable u/s 504 and 506(2) of the IPC and none of the offences have maximum 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;

(4) There is no MLC certificate to indicate that the victim has received any injury;

(5) Even, essential ingredients of offence punishable u/s 504 and 506(2) of the IPC are also not made out, as barely, there are words of passing threat of life, nothing more than that;

(6) 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2527/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

undefined

derogated to a particular caste or said to have 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2527/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

undefined

registered as C.R. No. 11195050220879 of 2022 with Tharad Police Station, District: Banaskantha,, the petitioners 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 petitioners :

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

(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 12th / 13th 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/2527/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

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 petitioners, 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 petitioners on bail. Direct service is permitted.

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