IMPORTANT POINT
The court's decision underscored the importance of evaluating the accused's role, antecedents, and the genuineness of the prosecution when considering anticipatory bail applications.

ORDER :

1. By way of the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R.No.I-11822004220561 of 2022 registered with Khergam Police Station.

2. Facts of the case are as under :-

2.1. The said First Information Report is given by one Harshad son of Arunbhai Jinabhai Pavar who is the Sarpanch of village Khundgam. He has stated that on October 08, 2022 when he was at home at 09.00 pm, he received a call from one Mayank Patel of village Khundpokda and informed that fire engine was summoned and therefore, he summoned the driver and fireman at Panchayat Office and he also reached at the Panchayat Office.

The first informant stated that meanwhile, the employee of the Panchayat Mr. Ramesh Patel and member of Panchayat Mr. Gokul Rathod had also arrived and therefore, everyone started from the office in the fire engine and reached at Khergam, however, the people were sitting the road and obstructed the road and though siren of fire engine was blowing continuously, no space was given. He also saw the MLA Mr. Anantbhai Patel in the said mob and he has stated that he had identified about 13 persons and did not permit to reach the shop where the fire took place. The mob has stated that shop of Bhikhubhai Ahir has been set on fire and no engine shall reach the shop and take away the fire engine and tried to assault with iron pipe and sticks and also damage the fire engine by breaking glass of windshield, signals and also damaged the wirings and assaulted its kicks. Hence, impugned FIR is filed.

3. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner/accused and learned APP for the State.

4. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the offence. Offence is registered as counter-blast to the FIR filed by the sitting MLA Mr.Anand Patel vide C.R.No.11822004220551 of 2022 dated 09.10.2022. It is submitted that since the petitioner is follower of sitting MLA Mr. Anand Patel, who belongs to other than ruling party, ergo to harass the petitioner, one after another false complaints are filed against the petitioner. It is submitted that FIR is filed after considerable long period. It is also submitted that on reading FIR, no-where role of the petitioner has been attributed in commission of offence. Every time in each offence it is stated that unlawful assembly of people gathered on the spot and have committed offence wherein petitioner was shown as part of unlawful assembly. It is submitted that three FIR are registered against the petitioner for one and same incident and it implies that FIR has been filed to harass the petitioner. It is submitted that all the FIRs are filed to tarnish political image of the petitioner who is supporter of sitting MLA. It is submitted that sitting MLA who has slated to be main accused in the offence has been granted anticipatory bail and therefore, principle of parity is attracted. It is submitted that the petitioner is dragged into offence as he is not following ruling party and is supporter of MLA who belongs to other party.

4.1. Making above submissions, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner is innocent, he is permanent resident of Navsari and has not played any role in commission of offence but merely, the petitioner was part of people gathered on the spot, has been falsely involved in the offence. The petitioner is ready and willing to extend co- operation to the Investigating Officer. There is no flight-risk. It is submitted that FIR is filed to take revenge against petitioner and therefore, the petitioner should be saved from humiliation of being arrested.

4.2. Upon above submissions, it is submitted to allow the petition and grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State objected to grant of bail. He would submit that the petitioner is not law abid