Back
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
VIJAY RAJUBHAI MANE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
CR.A 1206 2021
THE COURT HELD THAT THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO BAIL CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND QUASHED AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LOWER COURT REJECTING THE APPELLANT'S BAIL APPLICATION.
Headnote:
BAIL - ATROCITIES ACT - SECTION 3(2)(5) AND 3(2)(5-A) - [THE COURT HELD THAT THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO BAIL CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND QUASHED AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LOWER COURT REJECTING THE APPELLANT'S BAIL APPLICATION.]
Fact of the Case:
THE APPELLANT WAS ARRESTED AND CHARGED WITH OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 324, 325, AND 326 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, AS WELL AS SECTIONS 3(2)(5) AND 3(2)(5-A) OF THE SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989, FOR ALLEGEDLY STABBING THE VICTIM WITH A KNIFE AND CAUSING HIM GRIEVOUS INJURIES.
Finding of the Court:
THE COURT FOUND THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENTITLED TO BAIL CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, INCLUDING THE DELAY IN FILING THE FIR, THE NATURE OF THE INJURIES SUSTAINED BY THE VICTIM, AND THE LACK OF A CLEAR INTENTION TO COMMIT MURDER.
Issues: WHETHER THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO BAIL IN THE GIVEN CIRCUMSTANCES.
Ratio Decidendi: THE COURT RELIED ON THE FACT THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE FIR, THE NATURE OF THE INJURIES SUSTAINED BY THE VICTIM, AND THE LACK OF A CLEAR INTENTION TO COMMIT MURDER INDICATED THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENTITLED TO BAIL.
Final Decision: THE COURT ALLOWED THE APPEAL, QUASHED AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LOWER COURT REJECTING THE APPELLANT'S BAIL APPLICATION, AND ORDERED THE APPELLANT TO BE RELEASED ON BAIL SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
ORAL ORDER
1. The appellant preferred one Criminal Misc. Application No. 3865 of 2021 after charge-sheet before the Court of learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge and Special Atrocity Judge, Surat 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.11210012210944 of 2021 with Chowkbazar Police Station, Surat City for the offence punishable u/s. 324, 325 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s. 3(2)(5) and 3(2)(5-A) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (for short "the Atrocities Act") as well as u/s. 135 of Gujarat Police Act wherein, the learned learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge and Special Atrocity Judge, Surat rejected the said application on
26.07.2021.
2. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred present appeal u/s 14A of the Atrocities Act.
3. Heard learned advocate for the appellant, learned advocate for the respondent No.2 and learned APP for the respondent-State.
4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that allegations made against the appellant are baseless and without any evidence. That he is an innocent person and not involved in the offence directly or indirectly as stated by the complainant in the complaint. That alleged crime said to be occurred on 09.05.2021 while FIR was lodged on 15.05.2021 after delay of six days without any reasonable explanation. It is further submitted that FIR has been lodged by the injured victim and in the FIR it has been categorically stated by the complainant that after primary treatment he was shifted at home, which proves that the injury sustained by the complainant is not that much grievous as alleged. That appellant is aged about 25 years old boy and he is the only bread winner in the family and his parents are dependent upon him. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the appellant to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order 26.07.2021 passed by learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge and Special Atrocity Judge, Surat in Criminal Misc.
Application No. 3865 of 2021 and release the appellant on bail.
5. Learned APP for the respondent-State as well as learned advocate for the respondent No.2 have strongly objected the arguments advanced by learned advocate for the appellant and submitted that in a brutal manner, victim was stabbed with life threatening weapon on the back by the present appellant. That with an intention, appellant has used life threatening of knife making stab on the back of the complainant and beaten him which has resulted serious fracture to his spinal cord and due to which he is in bed ridden for life and unable to walk in future. It is further submitted that weapon knife was used by the appellant in commission of the offence, which was recovered from him as per the details of the panchnama. That prima facie, involvement of the appellant is established from the case papers of the prosecution and he cannot be released on bail as prayed for. That statements of the eye witnesses are also recorded in support of the prosecution case. Hence, it is requested by learned APP for the respondent-State as well as learned advocate for the respondent No.2 to dismiss this appeal.
6. 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 alleged offence was committed on 09.05.2021 near Sai Baba Temple. At the place of the offence, friend of the complainant namely Rakesh and present appellant were disputing in connection with a one matter. The complainant tried to intervene in their dispute, at that time, present appellant removed a knife from his pent and gave two blows on the back side of his body, and therefore, complainant fell down there. In scuffle taken place, he had received an injury on finger of his hand, and thereafter, the present appellant ran away from the place of t
