Gujarat High Court
Sushant @ Sallu Gopalbhai Kishanlal ... vs State Of Gujarat on 13 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2999/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO.
2999 of 2024
==========================================================
SUSHANT @ SALLU GOPALBHAI KISHANLAL SHARMA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SALMAN S KHAN(9496) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MR KRUTIK PARIKHA, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 13/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
[1.0] ADMIT. Learned APP waives service of notice of Admission for
and on behalf of the respondent No.1 - State of Gujarat.
[2.0] Present appeal 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 22.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Court No.16 (Special Atrocity Court), City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in
Criminal Misc. Application No.8557 of 2024 whereby the learned
Judge 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 C.R. No.11191037231175 of 2023
registered with Odhav Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the
offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 294(b), 506(2), 143, 147,
148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"); sections
3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short "Atrocity Act").
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2999/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2025
undefined
[3.0] Though served, respondent No.2 has chosen not to appear
before this Court.
[4.0] Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the
appellant is not involved in the commission of offence as alleged in
the FIR and has been falsely enroped in the offence. Further, now the
charge-sheet is filed and nothing is required to be recovered or
discovered from the present appellant. The allegation against the
appellant is that he hurled abusive language and assaulted the
complainant with kick and fist blows however, the co-accused having
played graver role and armed with deadly weapons have been
considered by the coordinate Bench and therefore, appellant is
entitled to the benefit of parity. Further, the appellant is behind the
bars since 03.01.2024 and therefore, the appellant is required to be
enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable terms and conditions.
[5.0] Per contra, learned APP appearing for the respondent - State
has vehemently opposed the present appeal and stated that there is
prima facie evidence against the appellant. Further, merely because
the charge-sheet is filed is not a ground to grant bail to the appellant
as the appellant is having past antecedent and if released on bail then
there is no possibility to stand to trial by the appellant and there is
possibility of tampering with the evidence and therefore, he has
requested to dismiss the present appeal.
[6.0] I have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments
canvassed by learned advocates for both the sides.
The only allegation in the FIR against the appellant is that he
hurled abusive language to the complainant and assaulted the
complainant with kick and fist blows and except this, there is no any
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2999/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2025
undefined
other allegation. It is pertinent to note that investigation is over and
nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present
appellant as the charge-sheet is filed. In view of the above, if the
appellant is not released on bail then it will be pre-trial conviction and
considering the principle of bail is rule and jail is exception, present
appeal deserves consideration with appropriate conditions. This Court
has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation reported in (2012)1 SCC 40. Further, the co-accused
having played graver role and armed with deadly weapon have been
considered by the coordinate Bench of this Court and therefore, in
view of decision of this Court in the case of Ramesh Batubhai Dabhi
vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2011 (3) GLR 1150, appellant is
entitled to the benefit of parity.
[7.0] Hence, the present appeal is allowed. The appellant is ordered to
be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.
No.11191037231175 of 2023 registered with Odhav Police Station,
Ahmedabad City on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees
Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that the
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 the India without prior permission of the concerned
trial court;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2999/2024 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2025
undefined
[e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a
month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00
p.m.;
[f] 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;
[h] shall not take undue advantage of liberty for prolonging
the trial by taking unnecessary adjournment;
[8.0] The authorities shall 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 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.
[9.0] At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima
facie observations made by this Court in the present order. Direct
service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
