Vikramsinh Prahladsinh Zala vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 8129 Guj

                                                                                   NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/CR.A/2431/2023                                ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023

                                                                                    undefined




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL - BEFORE CHARGESHEET) NO.
                         2431 of 2023
==========================================================
                         VIKRAMSINH PRAHLADSINH ZALA
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NITIN T GANDHI(5620) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
ROHANKUMAR M AMIN(8851) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                 Date : 08/11/2023

                                     ORAL ORDER

Heard learned advocate or the appellant and learned APP for the respondent - State.

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent-State.

2. Present appeal is filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "Atrocity Act") challenging the judgment and order dated 19.10.2023 passed by the leaned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.1569 of 2023, whereby the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar rejected the application filed by the present appellant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking regular bail in connection with FIR being

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2431/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023

undefined

C.R.No.11216005230683 of 2023 registered with Dahegam Police Station, District : Gandhinagar for the offences punishable under Sections 506(2), 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 395, 397, 307, 427 and 504 of the IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

3. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is not involved in commission of offence as alleged in the FIR and therefore, looking to the role of the appellant and nature of the allegations, the appellant is required to be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.

3.1. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that appellant is in judicial custody since 03.10.2023. It is submitted that present appellant is innocent and he has falsely enroped in the offence. It is submitted that the allegations levelled against the present appellant is far from the truth. It is submitted that nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the appellant-accused as substantial part of investigation is over. It is submitted that injury is caused on the hand of the injured/victim. It is further submitted that the appellant is sole breadwinner of his family. If he keep behind the bar for a long time, his family has to face starvation. Therefore, no purpose would be served to keep him behind the bar for long time. It is further submitted

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2431/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023

undefined

that similarly co-accused has been enlarged on bail by this Court. Hence, on the ground of parity, the present application may be allowed. Appellant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions imposed upon him. Hence, he has requested to allow the present application.

4. On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the respondent

- State vehemently opposed the appeal and submits that the appellant has played active role. It is stated that investigation is pending and if the present appellant is released on bail, there may be possibility to breach of public tranquility. It is stated that appellant is having chequered history and past antecedents. It appears that allegations are serious in nature affecting the society at large and looking to the facts as well as the allegations made against the appellant, no discretion would be required to be exercised.

4.1. It is further submitted that even after releasing the appellant, there is no possibility of standstill the trial and possibility of tampering with evidence cannot be ruled out.

5. Learned advocate learned advocate Jitendra P. Patel is permitted to appear for the complainant. He shall file his appearance during the course of the day. Registry to accept the same.

5.1. Learned advocate appearing for the complainant has adopted the same arguments canvassed by the learned APP and has

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2431/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023

undefined

submitted that cross-complaint are registered against each other. Learned advocate for the complainant has requested to dismiss the present appeal.

6. I have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments canvassed by learned advocates for both the sides. Considering the fact that the substantial part of investigation is over and cross-complaint is filed. Nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the appellant as the appellant is in jail since 03.10.2023. While granting bail, the Court has to consider the severity of punishment, gravity of offence and to take care the availability of the accused at the time of trial and last important aspect is that possibility of the tampering with an evidence. The important aspects are required to be considered while granting the bail. Considering the aforesaid fact and severity of punishment of the alleged offence as substantial part of investigation is over, therefore, no purpose would be served to keep the appellant behind the bar for long period, obviously, trial would take some time. Hence, discretion may be exercised in favour of the appellant.

6.1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations, this Court is of the opinion that, discretion is required to be exercised to enlarge the appellant on regular bail. This Court has considered the following facts while exercising discretion in favour of the appellant :-

(i) appellant is in jail since 03.10.2023;

(ii) substantial part of investigation is over;

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2431/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023

undefined

(iii) injury is caused on the hand of the injured/victim;

(iv) offence is not punishable with life or death;

(v) cross-complaint is filed against each other;

(vi) similarly co-accused has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 07.11.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No.2424 of 2023;

(vii) nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the appellant;

7. The Supreme Court established the principle that "bail is the rule and jail is exception." This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra versus Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2012)1 SCC 40.

7.1. In view of Law of parity laid down in the case of Rameshbhai Batubhai Dhabi vs State of Gujarat reported in (1999) 3 GLR 1150, discretion may be exercised in favour of the applicant.

7.2. In view of the aforesaid facts, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court, prima facie, is of the opinion that, this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the appellant on regular bail. Hence, present appeal is allowed and the appeal is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR being FIR being C.R.No.11216005230683 of 2023 registered with Dahegam Police Station, District : Gandhinagar, on executing personal bond of Rs.10,000/-

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2431/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023

undefined

(Rupees Ten thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injuries 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 Sessions Judge concerned;

[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 the concerned trial court;

[f] mark presence before the concerned Police Station between 1st to 10th day of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;

[g] not enter Dahegam for a period of 3 months and shall not indulge in such type of illegal activity. If appellant is found in such type of activity, his bail shall be cancelled and warrant under Section 70 shall be issued against him;

8. The Authorities will release the appellant only if the appellant 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

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/2431/2023 ORDER DATED: 08/11/2023

undefined

bond to be executed before the learned 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, learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the appellant on bail.

9. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) KUMAR ALOK