ORAL ORDER

1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR registered at C.R. No.I-34 of 2019 with Palej Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 324, 325, 504, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant would submit that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail by imposing suitable conditions.

3. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has opposed this application and granting anticipatory bail to the applicant looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. She submitted that two injured witnesses have stated that the applicant to be present in the mob and other eye witnesses have also supported such stand.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Y.N. Ravani, appearing for the original complainant states that earlier also the applicant is having antecedent and offence is registered against him.

5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, perused the investigation papers and have also taken into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, role attributed to the applicant- accused. Without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, reported at [2011] 1 SCC 6941, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has reiterated the law laid down by the Constitutional Bench in the case of Shri Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia and others, reported at (1980) 2 SCC 665.

Following aspects are also considered:-

I) The First Information Report is registered on 16.08.2019 for the offence which is alleged to have taken place on 16.08.2019.

(II) The investigation is in connection with the offence, where the applicant is shown to be part of the mob. The witnesses have shown him to be present with sword however, no specific role is attributed of carrying out any assault or use of sword.

III) The applicant is a practicing lawyer and submission of learned advocate for the applicant is that just because the applicant is the lawyer for the opposite party in the election of village Grampanchayat, he is sought to be falsely roped in.

IV)The submission of learned advocate for the applicant is that the applicant was actually present in the Court and to that effect CCTV footages have been submitted by the applicant to the Investigating Agency.

V) Considering the nature of rivalry between the parties and the fact that the applicant being a lawyer of co- accused Hasmitaben who is also enlarged on anticipatory bail.

VI) In rejoinder, it is submitted that the said offence is of private nature which is under Section 354 of IPC and Atrocities Act.

VII) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor under the instructions of the Investigating Officer is unable to bring on record any special circumstances against the applicant.

6. Learned Advocate for the applicant on instructions states that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions, including imposition of conditions with regard to the powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent court for his remand. He would further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of the applicant-accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.

7. In the result, the present application is allowed by directing that in the event of arrest of the applicant herein in connection with FIR registered as C.R. No.I-34 of 2019 with Palej Police Station, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees t