Gujarat High Court
Bhikhabhai Puniabhai Sangada vs State Of Gujarat on 20 August, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 GUJ 1213
Author: Ashutosh J. Shastri
Bench: Ashutosh J. Shastri
R/CR.MA/10225/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 10225 of 2020
==========================================================
BHIKHABHAI PUNIABHAI SANGADA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
for the Applicant(s) No. 2,3
MR SS SAIYED(3690) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
AJAYPRATAP R CHAUHAN(8774) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR JK SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI
Date : 20/08/2020
ORAL ORDER
1. When the matter is taken up for hearing, at the outset, Mr.S.S. Saiyed, learned advocate, after arguing for some time, has requested the Court to permit applicant Nos.1 and 2 to withdraw this application and present application be treated only for applicant No.3 - Samsubhai Puniyabhai Sangada. Accordingly, present application stands disposed of qua applicant Nos.1 and 2 and now, it is restricted to applicant No.3 only.
2. This application has been filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11821025200191 of 2020 registered with Katvara Police Station, District - Dahod for offence punishable under section 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 324 and 337 of the IPC.
3. Mr.S.S. Saiyed, learned advocate for the applicant, has Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 21 00:30:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/10225/2020 ORDER submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and wrongly been arraigned in the prosecution. It has been submitted that entire episode in the form of offence is on account of sudden provocation and there is no intention nor any motive to commit any crime. The applicant, on the contrary, is aged about 48 years and was suffering from heart ailment as it appears from the cause of action. Further, the death has occurred on account of delayed treatment and as such, in the absence of intention or motive to kill, the present applicant may not be allowed to languish in jail. Learned advocate has further submitted that the dispute which has given rise to the alleged incident is of a private nature and there was a free fight. On the contrary, on the side of present applicant also, one person is seriously injured and as such, there are all possibilities that present applicant might have been arraigned without any substance. For substantiating his plea, learned advocate has drawn the attention of this Court to the relevant papers attached to the present application and has submitted that the injuries which are mentioned in Column No.17 of PM Report reflecting on page- 64 are not so serious in nature and if proper treatment would have been meted out, possibly the death might not have occurred. Additionally, by referring to page-67 at bottom, the cause of death which has been mentioned is acute coronary insufficiency as a result of coronary artery disease. Now, this could not have been on the spur of moment. This coronary defect might have been developed during the passage of time prior to the commission of crime and, therefore, it cannot be said that this is a case of Section 302 of the IPC and at the best, it may be a case falling under purview of Section 304 of the IPC. Apart from that, by drawing attention to the observations made in Para.15, a specific contention is raised that at the best, the Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 21 00:30:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/10225/2020 ORDER present applicant has pelted the stones not to the deceased but, upon one of the witnesses and as such, this applicant has not contributed anything to the cause of death of the deceased. Hence, the learned advocate for the applicant has requested the Court to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant.
4. Mr.J.K.Shah, learned APP, has opposed this application mainly on the ground that the applicant was a participant in commission of crime in which one person has died and, therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant is totally innocent person. It has been pointed out that his presence was sufficient enough to attract the offence. When that be so, no discretion be exercised in favour of the applicant. Additionally, learned APP has pointed out that all these issues which have been raised by the applicant, can be taken care of during the course of trial. However, the learned APP could not withstand to the circumstance that cause of death was on account of coronary artery disease and this applicant undisputedly has given blot not to the deceased. When that be so, the learned APP has left it to the discretion of the Court.
5. Mr.A.R. Chauhan, learned advocate appearing on behalf of original complainant, has supported the stand taken by the learned APP. But since the present applicant is circumscribed to the case of applicant No.3 only, has left it to the discretion of the Court, more particularly when the present applicant has not given any blow to the deceased and accordingly, requested the Court to pass appropriate orders.
6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and having gone through the material on Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 21 00:30:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/10225/2020 ORDER record, one thing is not in dispute that the present applicant has not given any blow to the deceased. At the best, he has given or pelted the stones upon one of the witnesses. Additionally, the present applicant is not having any criminal antecedents and the dispute has arisen on account of sudden provocation and as such, insofar as the present applicant is concerned, there is no concrete material looking to the nature of incident, looking to the manner in which the applicant is arraigned and looking to the gravity of offence and now since the charge-sheet is already submitted, there is no likelihood of misuse of liberty, the case of the applicant deserves consideration.
6.1 Additionally, the Court has also gone through the order passed by the court below in which the blow given on the head of the deceased is not by present applicant, at least the case is made for grant of regular bail, the Court is inclined to consider the case of the applicant.
7. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11821025200191 of 2020 registered with Katvara Police Station, District - Dahod on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;
[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; [b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week; [d] not leave India without prior permission of the concerned trial Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 21 00:30:08 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/10225/2020 ORDER court;
[e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station between 1 st to 10th day of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. and shall remain present during the trial on all dates;
[f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the concerned trial court;
8. The authorities shall adhere to its own Circular relating to COVID-19 and, thereafter, will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.
9. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent qua applicant No.3 only.
10. The Registry to communicate this order to the concerned Court/authority by Fax or Email forthwith.
(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J) NAIR SMITA V. Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 21 00:30:08 IST 2020