Jivarambhai Dalrambhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat

B.N. Karia, J

The appellant preferred Criminal Misc. Application No. 308 of 2021 before the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Banaskantha at Tharad 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 C.R.

No.11195050211013 of 2021 registered with Tharad Police Station, Dist: Banaskantha for the offence punishable u/s. 354(A), 447, 342, 114 of the

Indian Penal Code and u/s. 3(1) (w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (for short ""the

Atrocities Act""), the learned Additional District Judge, Banaskantha at Tharad rejected the said application on 29.10.2021.

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

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

Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. That,

looking to the FIR and allegations made therein, no prima facie offence has been made out against him. That, on plain reading of the FIR, it is manifest

that none of the ingredients of the provisions of the IPC and Atrocities Act are satisfied and therefore, no prima facie case is made out against the

appellant. That, the allegations made in the FIR are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can even reach to a

conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceedings against the appellant. That, the charge sheet has been filed and no possibility of tampering

with evidence. That, if the allegations made in the FIR are taken at its face value and accepted in their entirety, prima facie, they do not constitute any

offence or make out a case against the appellant. That, the applicant has not participated in occurrence of the incident. That, the version as alleged by

the complainant is highly doubtful and there are serious doubts with regard to the credibility of the version of the complainant. That, the appellant is in

judicial custody since more than 5 months and if he is released on bail, he will not contact the respondent no.2 by any manner such a mobile phone,

personal visit or any direct or indirect way and will not harass the respondent no.2 as well as he will remain out of village Tharad as the court may

deem it fit. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the appellant to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order of rejecting the

prayer of bail by the appellant and release the appellant on bail.

Learned APP for the respondent No.1-State and learned advocate for the respondent no.2 have strongly objected the arguments advanced by learned

advocate for the appellant. That, the appellant is involved in the serious offence and therefore, the learned lower court has rejected the request of the

appellant to release him on bail. That, again and again, appellant behaves with the respondent no.2 and trying to forcefully touch her and therefore, the

complaint was lodged by the respondent no.2 before the Tharad Police Station on 13.08.2021. Learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has referred

four documents in form of undertaking given by the appellant narrating that he will not harass the respondent no.2, however, the appellant is trying to

harass the respondent no.2. It was further submitted that if the appellant would be released on bail again there would be a chance of tampering with

the witness and only because of filing charge sheet, no circumstances are changed and hence, learned APP for the respondent no.1-State and learned

advocate for the respondent no.2 have requested to dismiss the present appeal.

Having considered the facts of the case, submissions made by learned advocates for the respective parties as well as learned APP for the

respondent-State, it appears that the complaint was lodged against the present appellant u/s. 354(A), 447, 342, 114 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s.

3(1) (W)(1), 3(2)(2)(5-A) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989. It appears from the record that the

appellant as well as respondent no. 2 are serving as a teachers in the same school. From the record, it appears that on 28th June 2021, a complaint

was given by the respondent no.2 with the Mahila Police Station at Palanpur against the appellant for the harassment by the appellant. At that time,

issue was settled between them and compromise was arrived at. That, on 13.08.2021, impugned complaint was filed by the respondent no.2 with the

Tharad Police Station. It appears that thereafter, appellant preferred Criminal Misc. Application No. 16949 of 2021 before this court for quashing the

impugned FIR which is still pending for hearing. It appears that the appellant was arrested on 27th August 2021 and sent to the judicial custody and

presently, he is in sub jail at Tharad. It appears that charge sheet has been filed and thereafter, the appellant had preferred Criminal Misc. Application

No. 308 of 2021 before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge at Tharad which was rejected on 29th October 2021. Prima facie it appears

that to attract the provisions of Section 3(1)(w)(1), 3(2)(5-A) of the Atrocities Act, no satisfactory ingredients made out in the complaint.

Considering the nature and gravity of assertion made against the appellant and in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature

of allegations made against the appellant in the First Information Report as well as considering the role of present appellant in the alleged offence, this

Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of present appellant by enlarging him on regular bail and

hence, the prayer sought for by the present appellant requires consideration.

Hence, this Court is of the view that present appeal deserves consideration In the result, present Criminal Appeal is allowed and the impugned

judgment and order dated 29.10.2021 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Banaskantha at Tharad in Criminal Misc. Application No. 308 of

2021 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;

[f] not enter into Village/city Tharad till further orders.

[g] not contact the respondent no.2 directly or indirectly, failing which, the respondent no.2 would be at liberty to approach the competent court for

cancellation of the bail granted by 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.

Registry to communicate copy of this order to the concerned jail authorities as well as concerned Sessions Judge through Fax/E-mail.