Sohel Sikander Suleman Pathan vs State Of Gujarat

Nikhil S. Kariel, J

Heard learned Advocate Mr.Vaibhav Sheth appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned APP Mr.Dabhi for the respondent State. No one appears on behalf of respondent No.2, though served.

Admit. Learned APP waives service of notice of admission for the respondent State.

This appeal is filed by the appellant, under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act read with Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for being released on regular bail in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No.11199006211539 of 2021 on 4.12.2021 with Ankleshwar Rural Police station, District Bharuch for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, read with Sections 3(2)(ii) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Learned Advocate Mr.Vaibhav Sheth for the appellant would submit that the appellant is falsely implicated and he was not at all present when the incident had occurred. Learned Advocate Mr.Sheth would submit that there is no role played by the appellant in the alleged offence and he has been in jail since 5.12.2021. Learned Advocate Mr.Sheth, therefore, would request that this Court may be pleased to release the appellant on regular bail, subject to any stringent conditions as may be imposed by this Court.

Learned APP Mr.Dabhi appearing for the respondent State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of offence.

This Court, having considered the submissions of the learned Advocate Mr.Vaibhav Sheth for the appellant and learned APP Mr.Dabhi appearing for the respondent State and having considered the FIR as well as the charge-sheet papers, has considered the following relevant aspects:-

6.1. that the allegations reveal that there were two separate incidents involving the deceased, inasmuch as in the first incident, the present appellant along with other accused are stated to have assaulted the deceased and whereas, the present appellant is alleged to have slapped the deceased and whereas after the assault, all the accused are stated to have left from the place of incident;

6.2. it further appears that some time thereafter one of the accused being accused No.2 had returned back to the place of incident and assaulted the deceased with a knife, which prima facie resulted into the death of the deceased;

6.3. that there does not seem to be any involvement of the present appellant in the second incident and it does not appear that the present appellant was present around the place of incident at the time when the second incident was taken place;

6.4. that the present appellant does not have any antecedents and he is stated to be in custody since 5.12.2021.

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against in the First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the appellant on regular bail.

Hence, the present appeal is allowed. The appellant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No.11199006211539 of 2021 on 4.12.2021 with Ankleshwar Rural Police station, District Bharuch, on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

[e] not enter in the limits of Ankleshwar Taluka for six months from the date of release;

[f] furnish the present address of residence to the I.O. and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer concerned;

[g] shall also furnish the address of residence outside Ankleshwar, where he would be residing during the six months, to the I.O. and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer concerned;

[h] mark his presence once in every fortnight for a period of next six months at the nearest Police Station of his place of stay, when he would be staying out of Ankleshwar Taluka, the nearest police station to be decided by the learned Trial Court.

[i] once he enters Ankleshwar, he shall mark his presence once in a month for next six months or till the trial is over, whichever is earlier.

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 stage of trial, the trial court shall not be influenced by any observations of this Court which are of preliminary nature made at this stage, only for the purpose of considering the application of the appellant for being released on regular bail.

The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Direct service is permitted.