Bhargavbhai Kalyanbhai Dhandhukiya vs State Of Gujarat

B.N. Karia, J

The appellant has filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 1922 of 2019 before the court of learned 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar

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 I â€

C.R. No. 31 of 2019 with Palitana Rural Police Station, Bhavnagar for the offence punishable u/s 436, 323, 504, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and

u/s. 3(1)(R)(S), 3(2)(5)(a) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (for short “the Atrocities Actâ€),

wherein the learned 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar rejected the said application on 30.11.2019.

Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred said appeal u/s 14A(2) of the Atrocities Act.

Heard learned advocate for the appellant, learned advocate for the respondent No.2 and learned for the respondent no.1- State.

Learned advocate for the appellant submits that present appellant is innocent and wrongly involved in the offence. That, present appellant is only the

bread winner of the family members. That, incident is alleged to have happened on 08.10.2019, whereas the FIR is lodged on 16.10.2019. The FIR is

lodged after 8 days from the date of occurrence of the offence and in the FIR, there is no reason or explanation for late lodging of FIR. He further

submits that when the house was allegedly lit on the fire there were four members present in the family and nobody was injured or burnt in the

incident. It clearly shows that the present appellant is wrongly involved in the offence. He further submits that Investigating Officer did not recover

any kind of flammable substance or any vessel carrying the flammable substance or any bought flammable substance or the clothes of the present

appellant were not smelling of any flammable substance. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the appellant to quash and set aside the

impugned judgment and order passed by the learned 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar.

From the other side, Learned APP for the respondent-State as well as learned advocate for the respondent No.2 have seriously objected the

submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant submitting that appellant has fired the house of the complainant and caused damage to the

tune of Rs.50,000/-. It is further submitted that incident was happened for one earlier case which was registered before the Palitana (Rural) Police

Station against the present appellant and he wants to settle the dispute and therefore to pressurize the complainant, appellant has committed present

offence. It is further submitted that two witnesses namely Punjabhai Rajabhai Maru and Guariben Punjabhai Maru have submitted that during the

commission of crime they were present. That, prima facie appellant is involved in the offence. Learned advocate for the respondent No.2 has

submitted that relatives of the present appellant had tried to harm and threatened the complainant to settle the present complaint. Therefore,

respondent No.2 has also made complaint to the Police Inspector, Palitana, Home Department and Dy.S.P. Bhavnagar on 26.12.2019. Affidavit has

been filed by complainant-respondent No.2, which is taken on record. Considering the involvement of the present appellant hence it was requested by

learned APP as well as leaned advocate for the respondent No.2 to dismiss the appeal.

Having considered the facts and submissions made by learned advocates of the respective parties as well as learned APP for the respondent-State it

appears from the allegations made in the complaint, complaint is divided in two parts. If we consider the second part which is material to decide

present appeal, the complainant his grandfather and grandmother were sleeping in the house at about, 2:30 am, fire was set in the house. The

complainant had awaken his grandfather and grandmother. His grandmother, became unconscious, and therefore, ambulance was called and she was

shifted to government hospital alongwith his grandfather wherein treatment was given. The statement was given by grandmother of the complainant

that in the night, the present appellant came covering his face with a hanckerchief and burned the house. There was a damage of Rs.50,000/- on

account of setting fire to the house etc. Two witnesses including the grandfather of the present appellant has supported the case of the present case

as well as grandmother. Grandmother has stated in her statement that the present appellant came in the house with covering his face with the

handkerchief. Panchnama of the scene offence was prepared by the ivestigating agency showing damages for the house to the tune of Rs.50,000/- . It

appears that no serious injury was caused to her. It appears that complainant is in habit of filing of such complaint. Sarpanch of the village has

requested the Home Minister that complainant is giving threats to the villagers of the village to involve in the forged cases. Criminal cases are also

registered against him. Most of the villages are under tension from the complainant. Considering the aforesaid facts of the present case, prayer made

by the present appellant requires for consideration.

In the result, present Criminal Appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and order dated 30.11.2019 passed by the learned 4th Additional District

and Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar in Criminal Misc. Application No. 1922 of 2019 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;

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.

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. Direct service is permitted