JUDGMENT :

Nikhil S. Kariel, J.

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Harshit S. Tolia on behalf of the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 499 of 2018, learned Advocate Mr. B.M. Mangukiya on behalf of the appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos. 603 of 2021 and 854 of 2021, learned Advocate Mr. R.J. Goswami on behalf of the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 880 of 2019, learned APP Mr. L.B. Dabhi for the respondent-State and learned Advocate Ms. Megha Jani for the respondent No. 2-first informant in all these matters.

2. These appeals are filed by the appellants, under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 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 CR - I No. 127 of 2016 on 11.07.2016 with Una Police Station, District Gir Somnath, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 397, 395, 365, 355, 354, 342, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 504, 506(2), 120(B), 201, 166A, 167, 466, 177, 204, 294(b), 505(1)(b), 509, etc. of the Indian Penal Code; Sections 135 of the Gujarat Police Act; Sections 3(1)(e), (r), (s), (u), 3(2)(5a), 3(1)(d), 3(1)(za)(E), 3(1)(w)(i),(ii), 3(2)(vi), 3(2)(vii), 4 etc. of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; Sections 66A and 66B of the Information Technology Act.

3. Apart for the role attributed to the appellants, as coming out from the FIR and the charge-sheet, the only difference while considering the case of the appellants for regular bail, would be the fact that the appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 499 of 2018 and Criminal Appeal No. 854 of 2021, have preferred the appeals for second time, hence they are successive appeals, more particularly the said appellants having approached this Court in the year 2017 and learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court having permitted the said appellants to withdraw the said appeals with liberty to file fresh appeals if the trial does not commence within a reasonable time period. Insofar as the other appellants i.e. the appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos. 603 of 2021 and 880 of 2019 are concerned, the said appeals have been filed by them for the first time seeking to be released on regular bail.

4. Learned Advocates on behalf of the respective appellants would submit the incident in question, had happened on 11.07.2016 and whereas the FIR was filed on very same day and there appellants were also arrested on the very next day i.e. on 12.07.2016. Learned Advocates would submit that the Investigating Officer had filed the charge-sheet within stipulated period and whereas the trial has also commenced. It is further submitted that having regard to the fact that the appellants are in custody for more than 06 years and considering that the investigation had completed long back and whereas now the trial has also started, this Court may consider releasing the present appellants on regular bail. It is also submitted by the learned Advocates for the appellants that while the role attributed to the appellants as coming out from the FIR and the charge-sheet being that the present appellants were the principal perpetrators of the alleged crime in question and whereas it is submitted by learned Advocates in this behalf that allegations are of committing offence under the Indian Penal Code as well as under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It is submitted that the most serious offence under the Indian Penal Code being offence punishable under Section 307 and whereas while there may not be any such injuries, which may have been caused by the present appellants to the victims, which would correspond to the alleged offence, but in any case, it is submitted that since the said offence envisages maximum imprisonment for a period of 10 years and considering that more than half of the maximum possible sentence has been spent by the appellants in prison, therefore this Court may consider rel