Sujitkumar Bhimsinh Parmar vs State Of Gujarat

Umesh A. Trivedi, J

These appeals are filed by accused under Section 14(A) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989)(herein referred to as "the Act") praying for an order of regular bail in connection with offence registered as C.R. No.11197034210001/2021 with Padra Police Station, Vadodara Rural for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 302, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) of "the Act" and Section 135 of the G.P. Act.

Endorsement in the cause list shows that respondent No.2 - original first informant is served in all the appeals but he has chosen not to appear either in person or through an advocate.

According to the case of prosecution, in the field of one Dilipbhai Choksi's abundant stable, the accused as also deceased assembled together and arranged for a party consuming liquor and eating non-veg. During that time, there was some verbal altercation with complainant and Abhijit with regard to supremacy of identity as a goon. Pursuant thereto, Abhijit is alleged to have taken the mobile from one Sujit and shown some video where Abhijit - co-accused claimed that he had stabbed 3 persons in Elora Park with dagger. To that, co-accused Devendrasinh @ Darshan Satapalsinh Chaudhary asked Abhijit not to boast for it and stopped video, which led to a scuffle and during that time, from the said persons assembled, two groups created and present appellants formed one group led by Abhijit assaulted one Hitesh - Deceased. As per the case of the prosecution, the complainant Bhaveshkumar @ Bhampo Thakorbhai Parmar was abused with regard to his caste and present appellants started giving kick and fist blows to the deceased. It is further the case of the prosecution that one Kaushal Bipinbhai Patel took out wooden log and gave blow at the backside of the head of the deceased - Hitesh as also on the back. It is further the case of the prosecution that Abhijit took out Ice Breaker (Pointed screw driver type nail) and inflicted blow on the chest of the deceased as also on the back of his right ear and thereby caused murder of Hitesh.

Learned advocates appearing for the respective parties submitted that there is no unlawful assembly as alleged by the prosecution and it was a spontaneous act by the accused on a sudden quarrel where there are cross cases filed by co-accused Kaushal also and he is injured, as is revealed from the medical certificate in the cross case, who had filed the complaint against Abhijit and other witnesses of this case. Therefore, it is submitted that the appellants who have not caused any fatal injuries to the deceased, they may be enlarged on bail.

As against that, Ms. C.M. Shah, learned APP vehemently submitted that since co-accused Kaushal Bipinbhai Patel has caused head injury with the wooden log to the deceased, he may not be enlarged on bail. She has further submitted that all the accused can be said to have formed an unlawful assembly and all of them may be refused bail. She has further submitted that if at all, along with other co-accused, if Kaushal is also to be released, it be recorded that no parity be claimed by anyone. In short, in her submissions, all these appeals praying for regular bail should be rejected. It is further submitted that the appellants are having criminal antecedents in the nature of committing prohibition offence registered against each of them.

Having heard the learned advocates for the respective appellants as also looking at the investigation papers, it is clear that both the sides i.e. accused as also deceased and prosecution witnesses assembled together to enjoy a liquor party with non-veg, may be under influence of alcohol there was some quarrel between two of them which led to create two groups. However, since there is a cross case and free-fight between the appellants and prosecution witnesses of a spontaneous quarrel without any per-meditation, I deem it fit to enlarge the appellants on bail, who are not responsible for causing any fatal injury to even deceased, except Kaushal, rest of the appellants are not at all responsible for causing injury to the deceased. Whereas Kaushal is said to have inflicted wooden log blow over the head of the deceased and also on the back of him.

However, if cause of death is seen from the postmortem note, it is clear that stab injuries to chest and neck is responsible for causing shock and haemorrhage, which caused death of the deceased. The submission with regard to criminal antecedents of each of the appellants, according to prosecution itself they assembled there for consuming liquor. In that respect, aforesaid offence projected to be antecedents came to be recorded. Otherwise, it is part and parcel of the very same offence and therefore, the appellants having no criminal antecedents is also a factor to be considered along with their participation into the offence, which led this Court as an added factor to grant bail to each of the appellants.

Hence, each of the appellants are ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11197034210001/2021 with Padra Police Station, Vadodara Rural on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/-each (Rupees Ten Thousand only) on their executing one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that the appellants 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 appellants only if they are 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.

Accordingly, present appeals are allowed. Direct service is permitted.