Gujarat High Court
Ketanbhai Lalitbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 4 January, 2016
Author: A.J.Desai
Bench: A.J.Desai
R/CR.MA/23030/2015 CAV ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO.23030
of 2015
With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 24017 of 2015
=========================================
KETANBHAI LALITBHAI PATEL....Applicant Versus STATE OF GUJARAT....Respondent ========================================= Appearance :
MR BM MANGUKIYA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant. MS BELA A PRAJAPATI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant. MR MITESH AMIN, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent. ========================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI Date : 4/1/2016 COMMON CAV ORDER
1. By way of the present applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants - accused have prayed to release them on regular bail in connection with the FIR bearing I C.R. No.90 of 2015 registered with D.C.B. Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 121, 121A, 124A, 153A, 153B and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 during the pendency of the trial (at present for the offences punishable under Sections 121A and 124A of the Indian Penal Code).
2. The brief facts emerged from the record are as under :-
2.1 That one K.N. Patel, Assistant Commissioner of Police (Crime), Detection of Crime Branch, Ahmedabad City lodged an FIR with the Ahmedabad D.C.B. Police Station on 21.10.2015 as I C.R. No.90 of 2015 against six persons named as accused who have allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 121, 121A, Page 1 of 7 HC-NIC Page 1 of 7 Created On Tue Jan 05 00:40:31 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/23030/2015 CAV ORDER 124A, 153A, 153B and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 making accusation against the accused, that they formed an organization, namely, Patidar Anamat Andolan Samity (hereinafter referred to as 'PAAS') to seek status in the Society like other backward class for Patidar community to get reservation in Government jobs as well as for getting admission for educational purposes. It is alleged in the FIR that though the recommendations of Bakshi Commission was accepted by the State of Gujarat in the year 1981, and a special class being Socially and Economically Backward Castes (SEBC) was created for reservation in Government jobs and education, the founders of the said Organization PAAS, started agitation, for getting Patidar community included in the said SEBC, against State of Gujarat. It is alleged in the FIR that a conspiracy was hatched between the accused persons as well as those persons who were not initially named in the FIR, started such activities which would create hatred and contempt towards the Government of Gujarat.
Under the guidance of the accused persons, public gatherings / demonstrations were held in different parts of the State of Gujarat without taking necessary permission from the concerned authorities. Number of such gatherings were organized between 6.7.2015 to 28.8.2015. More than 300 rallies etc. were conducted in which such speeches were delivered by the leaders of Patidar community, which created hatred and contempt against the State of Gujarat which resulted into disturbance to law and order situation. It is alleged in the FIR that the leader of PAAS, namely, Hardik Patel and the members of Core Committee - the applicants, hatched conspiracy to create such an atmosphere that the State may face caste clashes, since there was opposition of those castes which were included in SEBC. By referring and reproducing several speeches in the FIR itself, it was alleged that the accused persons including the present applicants had committed the above Page 2 of 7 HC-NIC Page 2 of 7 Created On Tue Jan 05 00:40:31 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/23030/2015 CAV ORDER referred offences.
2.2 It is further alleged in the FIR that the Government tried to resolve the issue by inviting the members of the Core Committee. However, due to rigidity adopted by the members of the Core Committee, the talks failed. A huge rally was organized at Ahmedabad. However, at the end of the same, the gathering became violent which resulted into rioting at Ahmedabad and subsequently in different parts of the State of Gujarat. Several allegations have been made in the FIR by reproducing the language used by the accused including the applicants herein.
2.3 The applicants came to be arrested on 21.10.2015. The applicants did file Criminal Misc. Application No.4519 and 4582 of 2015 respectively which came to be rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad vide orders dated 18.11.2015 and 11.12.2015 respectively. Hence, the present applications.
3. Mr. B.M. Mangukiya, learned advocate appearing for the applicants has vehemently submitted that no offences as alleged in the FIR have been committed by the applicants. He would submit that though initially, FIR came to be filed for the offences punishable under Sections 121, 121A, 124A, 153A, 153B and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, however, at present the applicants are facing charges only for the offences punishable under Sections 121A and 124A of the Indian Penal Code. He would further submit that the applicants did prefer an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 along with other accused persons being Special Criminal Application Nos.6330, 6339, 6263, 6264 and 6265 of 2015. The petition filed Page 3 of 7 HC-NIC Page 3 of 7 Created On Tue Jan 05 00:40:31 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/23030/2015 CAV ORDER by the applicants were entertained in part and vide oral order dated 1.12.2015, except the charges levelled against the present applicants under Sections 121A and 124A of the Indian Penal Code, other Sections came to be quashed by the coordinate Bench of this Court. He would further submit that the said order dated 1.12.2015 of the coordinate Bench of this Court is under challenge before the Hon'ble Supreme Court at the instance of applicants which is pending for hearing.
4. Mr. Mangukiya would further submit that no offence under Section 121A or 124A of the Indian Penal Code as alleged have been committed by any of the applicants. He would submit that there is no direct nexus between the legitimate demand made by the Patidars and the alleged incidents which have taken place in different parts of the State. He would submit that no speech has been delivered by any of the applicants or have not used such words to bring or any attempt has been made to bring into hatred or contempt or excites disaffection towards the Government established by law in India. By taking me through the FIR and particularly the reproduction of the language used by the applicants on mobile conversation, he would submit that the case does not fall under Section 124A or 121A of the Indian Penal Code. An agitation for demanding some legitimate right itself would not become an offence and, therefore, the applicants may be released on bail. He would submit that it is a fundamental right of a citizen to claim any right or make any demand and, therefore, the intention of the Investigating Agency to pick up some sentences from the conversation and reproducing the same in the FIR itself would not constitute any offence. In support of his submissions, he has relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sri. Indra Dass v. State of Assam, reported in 2011 Page 4 of 7 HC-NIC Page 4 of 7 Created On Tue Jan 05 00:40:31 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/23030/2015 CAV ORDER CRIMINAL LAW JOURNAL 1646, Nazir Khan and others v. State of Delhi reported in (2003) 8 SCC 461, Balwant Singh and another v. State of Punjab reported in (1995) 3 SCC 214 and in the case of Lingaram Kadopi v. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2014) 3 SCC 474. He, therefore, submitted that the applicants be released on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
5. By relying upon a constitutional Bench decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, AIR 1962 SC 955, he would submit that the applicants have used their constitutional right having freedom of speech and, therefore, the applicants may be released on bail.
6. On the other hand, Mr. Mitesh Amin, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State would submit that out of six accused who are named in the FIR, four accused have been arrested. One of the accused is absconding and not available. One of the accused who had filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before this Court, the State Government was restrained from arresting the said accused. The said order is challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court however, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has refused to extend the protection granted by this Court. He would further submit that the coordinate Bench of this Court while dealing with the present FIR has categorically held that the applicants have prima facie committed an offence punishable under Sections 121A and 124A of the Indian Penal Code for which the punishment prescribed is upto life imprisonment. He would submit that the investigation is still going on and it is not desirable to release the applicants at this stage. Since the investigation is not completed and charge-sheet Page 5 of 7 HC-NIC Page 5 of 7 Created On Tue Jan 05 00:40:31 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/23030/2015 CAV ORDER has not been filed, Mr. Amin has supplied typed copies of the details of each of the applicants who have used several mobile phones and has provided the transcript of interception data. He would submit that the language used by each of the applicants prima facie establishes that the intention of the applicants was to create hatred and contempt in the society against the Government established by law. By providing various details, with regard to "Andolan" of Patidar community, at the behest of the applicants, resulted into lodgment of 229 FIRs at the instance of the Government and at the instance of public, 111 offences have been registered. Further, seven lives of public and one Police Officer have lost their lives in different crimes registered with various Police Stations pursuant to the said Patidar Andolan. 27 individuals as well as 203 Police personnel were injured. He would further submit that 1822 public properties and 108 public vehicles have been damaged. 52 Police Stations in number, have been damaged by the crowed gathered for Andolan at the behest of the leaders of PAAS while 300 vehicles have been set ablaze. 291 buses of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation have been damaged and the properties of the members of Parliament and 11 Members of the Legislative Assembly have been damaged. Number of passenger trains and goods trains were compelled to be diverted and cancelled pursuant to agitations carried out by the Patidar community pursuant to the speeches delivered by the leaders of PASS. He would submit that the investigation is at crucial stage and, therefore, it is not desirable to release the applicants at this stage.
7. I have heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and perused the FIR as well as papers of investigation so far carried out. It is an undisputed fact that at present, the Page 6 of 7 HC-NIC Page 6 of 7 Created On Tue Jan 05 00:40:31 IST 2016 R/CR.MA/23030/2015 CAV ORDER applicants are facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections 121A and 124A of the Indian Penal Code for which maximum punishment is upto life sentence. Out of six accused, who are named in the FIR, only four accused have been arrested and one is absconding. I have also gone through the transcript provided by learned Public Prosecutor and the details about lodgment of FIRs, death toll and the fact that number of police personnel came to be attacked and immovable and movable properties of public as well as Government have been damaged and the fact that even the Passenger Trains and Goods Trains have been cancelled and diverted pursuant to the agitation, I am of the opinion that at this stage, it is not desirable to release the applicants on bail.
8. I have considered the judgments relied upon by Mr. Mangukiya which are referred to herein above and the same have not been dealt with since the investigation is in progress and has yet not been completed.
9. It is needless to say that the applicants would be at liberty to file fresh applications after completion of investigation and submission of charge-sheet, in accordance with law.
10. In the result, the present applications are not entertained at this stage and hence, they are rejected accordingly. Rule discharged.
(A.J.DESAI, J.) Savariya Page 7 of 7 HC-NIC Page 7 of 7 Created On Tue Jan 05 00:40:31 IST 2016