State Of Gujarat vs Prahaladsinh Ganubha Jadeja
2023 Latest Caselaw 752 Guj

     R/CR.A/976/2022                                         ORDER DATED: 31/01/2023




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                       R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 976 of 2022
==========================================================
                             STATE OF GUJARAT
                                   Versus
                        PRAHALADSINH GANUBHA JADEJA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. H.K. PATEL, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS ANUSHREE M SONI(11431) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE

                                 Date : 31/01/2023
                                  ORAL ORDER

1. By preferring present appeal under Section 14A of the

Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act 1989 (In short "Atrocity Act"), appellant-State has

requested to quash and set aside the judgment and order

dated 24.08.2021 passed by the court of learned 7 th Additional

Sessions Judge, Kachchh at Anjar granting anticipatory bail of

the accused in Criminal Misc. Application No. 323 of 2021 and

to take the respondent No.1 - accused in custody forthwith.

2. Heard learned APP for the appellant-State.

3. It was submitted by learned APP for the appellant-State that

The investigating officer had filed a detailed affidavit and

opposed the grant of the bail on 21.08.2021. By the order

dated 24.08.2021 passed by the court of learned 7 th Additional

R/CR.A/976/2022 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2023

Sessions Judge, Kachchh at Anjar had granted the anticipatory

bail to the respondent accused. That, the accused had formed

illegal and unlawful assembly outside the school where the

election procedure going on. The accused had uttered the

humiliating words against the caste of the complainant in public

place and in presence of many persons. The offence committed

by the respondent are punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(2)

(va) and 3(1)(S) of the Atrocity Act and read with Section 135 of

Gujarat Police Act. That, trial court ought to have considered

that affidavit filed by the investigating officer in which it was

categorically stated that there are witnesses who were present

at the time of the incident. That, trial court ought to have

considered that the respondent no.1-accused person had

humiliated the origihal complainant by uttering the Caste

related words in the public place and in that circumstances,

granting the anticipatory bail to the accused person and in

much lenient view in favour of the respondents no.1 which is

not permissible as per the Atrocity Act. As per section 18 of the

Atrocity Act, the provision of anticipatory bail clearly barred and

the order passed by learned District and Sessions Court which

is beyond the statutory powers.

4. Having heard learned advocate for the appellant and findings

arrived at by the trial court while granting prayer made by the

R/CR.A/976/2022 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2023

respondent No.1, this court deems it not fit to issue notice to

the respondent.

5. Prosecution has attracted Section 3(1)(R) and 3(1)(S) of the

Atrocity Act.

Section 3(1)(R) of the Atrocity Act provides as under:

"Whoever not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or

a Scheduled Tribe, intentionally insults or intimidates

with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste

or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view;"

Section 3(1)(S) of the Atrocity Act provides as under:

"Whoever not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or

a Scheduled Tribe, abuses any member of a Scheduled

Caste or a Scheduled Tribe by caste name in any place

within public view; "

6. It appears from the record that the complainant Dipakbhai

Manjibhai Sanjot (Dalit) had filed a complaint at Anjar Police

Station, Kachchh vide C.R No. 11993003211063 of 2021 for the

offence punishable under Sections 323, 294(b) and 114 of the

Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(R)(S) and 3(2)(5a) of the

Atrocity Act. As per the case of the complainant, the accused

person had insulted by uttering filthy words for the caste of the

complainant. All the accused formed unlawful assembly and

R/CR.A/976/2022 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2023

threatened the complainant. In the entire complaint, it is

nowhere stated by the complainant that after the poll, any hurt

or grievous hurt was caused or any assault was made. It is

nowhere stated in the complaint that any threaten was

imposed social or economic boycott upon him being a member

of Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe or prevents from

availing benefits of any public service which is due to him. No

averments are made by the complainant in his complaint to

attract Section 3(1)(N) of the Atrocity Act. Further clear

absence of intention to insult or intimidate with intent to

humiliate the complainant being a member of SC/ST in any

place within public view is also there in the complaint. Further,

if we again read the entire complaint filed by the complainant,

it is nowhere stated that the respondents No.1 and 2 have

abused the complainant, he being a member of SC/ST by caste

name in any place within public view. No specific allegations

were made by the complainant against the accused persons to

attract the provisions of Sections 3(1)(R) and 3(1)(S) of the

Atrocity Act.

7. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties

as well as and conclusion arrived at by the learned 7 th

Additional Sessions Judge, while allowing the anticipatory bail

filed by the applicant vide order dated 24.8.2021 in Criminal

R/CR.A/976/2022 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2023

Misc. Application No. 323 of 2021, appears that the offence has

been registered with Anjar Police station vide FIR bearing C.R.

No. 11993003211063 of 2021 for the offences punishable

under Sections 323, 294(b) and 114 of the IPC and under

Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Atrocities Act and

under Section 135 of the G.P. Act and apprehension of his

arrest, he approached the learned Sessions Court, wherein,

vide order dated 24.8.2021 his anticipatory bail has been

granted and against the the said order the State has preferred

the present appeal requesting to cancel the anticipatory bail

granted to the applicant. It appear from the averments made

by the applicant - State in it's application that there is a

specific allegation that the respondent No.1 had humiliated the

original complainant by uttering the caste related words but

from the conclusion arrived at by the learned Sessions Court

concerned, it appears that the learned Sessions Court has

specifically mentioned that as allegations made in the

complaint nowhere has stated that any wording have been

used insulting the caste of the complainant not only that earlier

an incident of accident has been occurred between the parties.

Complainant is not knowing any third party the witness but

they have not supported to the version insulting words towards

caste and the learned Sessions Court has observed that there is

no prima - facie case using the words consulting caste of the

R/CR.A/976/2022 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2023

complainant. This Court is fully aware with the aspects of

deciding the application of canceling bail earlier granted to the

accused and generally at the time of deciding bail application

evaluation of the evidence is not required.

8. From the aforesaid discussion as well as the conclusion of the

learned Sessions Court, it is made clear that the using of words

insulting the caste of the complainant is the subject matter of

evidence, but at this stage, this Court is to consider only gravity

of offence as well as role played by the accused for the offence.

But while considering the conclusion of the learned Sessions

Court, it appears that prima-facie case is not made out

regarding the use of the words against caste of the

complainant and therefore, this Court is not inclined to accept

the prayer made by the appellant - State to cancel the bail of

the applicant and therefore, the present appeal is liable to be

rejected and accordingly stands rejected. Notice stands

discharged.

(SAMIR J. DAVE,J) prk