Gujarat High Court
Dalsukhbhai Fakirbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 28 April, 2015
Author: Paresh Upadhyay
Bench: Paresh Upadhyay
R/CR.MA/6149/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL ) NO. 6149 of
2015
===========================================================
DALSUKHBHAI FAKIRBHAI PATEL ....Applicant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT ....Respondent
================================================================
Appearance:
MR PUSHPADATTA VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Applicant
MR L B DABHI APP for the Respondent State
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY
Date : 28/04/2015
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with CR-I No. 03 of 2015 registered with the Hansot Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 332, 337, 427, 435, 323, 504, 506, 325, 295, 452, 380 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Section 3(1) (10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. This Court, while issuing Notice on 31.03.2015, had passed the following order.
"1. These two are applications for anticipatory bail.
2. The applicants apprehend arrest in connection with CR-I No. 03 of 2015 registered with the Hansot Police Station, District: Bharuch. The said F.I.R. was registered on 14.01.2015, initially for the offences punishable under Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/6149/2015 ORDER Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 332, 337, 427 and 435 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. Subsequently, other Sections are added like Sections 323, 504, 506, 325, 295, 452, 380 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The narration in the F.I.R. itself indicates that mobs had come out from both the sides. It is communally sensitive area. The said incident is sought to be given different colour subsequently. The applicants are not named in the F.I.R. Further the applicant of Criminal Misc. Application 6148 of 2015 is in Government service.
3. Issue Notice returnable on 28.04.2015. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent-State. It is ordered that, the applicants shall not be arrested in connection with CR-I No. 03 of 2015 registered with the Hansot Police Station, District: Bharuch, till the next date of hearing. Direct service is permitted."
3. Mr.L.B.Dabhi,learned Additional Public Prosecutor has contested this application and has submitted that the protection granted by this Court earlier in favour of the applicant be not continued. Learned APP has also submitted that since the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are invoked, it would be impermissible for the Court to grant / continue such protection.
4. Having heard learned advocates for the respective Page 2 of 4 R/CR.MA/6149/2015 ORDER parties and considering the totality, this Court finds that, the matter requires detailed consideration.
5. Rule.
6. The interim protection granted earlier need not be vacated, during the pendency of this application, for the following reason.
6.1 As noted above, initially the F.I.R. was registered on 14.01.2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 332, 337, 427 and 435 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.
6.2 After about a fortnight, on 30.01.2015, other Sections are added like Sections 323, 504, 506, 325, 295, 452, 380 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
6.3 The narration in the complaint describes in detail the unrest in the town on the festival day (14.01.2015), and the reasons for it. From the reading thereof, an unmistakable picture emerges and that is of communal unrest (i.e. two groups divided on religions, and not caste). In the village, there was aggression from both the sides and necessarily, if somebody wishes, it can further be divided in sub-groups of castes. It is this perversity, which is implemented by the Investigating Agency, prima facie, for the reasons other than bona fide. Be that as it may, if the law laid down by Honourable the Supreme Court of India in the case of Siddaram Page 3 of 4 R/CR.MA/6149/2015 ORDER Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra reported in AIR 2011 SC 312 is kept in view, refusal to protect the applicant would be in straight conflict with the mandate of the Apex Court and it would endorse the attempt of the vested interests to further divide the divisions in the town. This would, in no way, serve the purpose sought to be achieved by the law makers while enacting the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Not only it is so, in the present case, it would prove to be counter-productive.
6.4 In view of above, it is ordered that, the interim protection granted by this Court on 31.03.2015 shall continue during the pendency of this application.
Direct service is permitted.
(PARESH UPADHYAY, J.) Amit/114 Page 4 of 4