MOINKHAN MEHMOODKHAN PATHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed seeking anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR, being C.R. No.11191043200506 of 2020 registered with Shahpur Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 326 , 323 , 294(a) , 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.

(2.) Learned advocate Ms. Hetvi H. Sancheti appearing for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and has been wrongly arraigned in the prosecution. It has further been submitted that while considering the anticipatory bail application of the co-accused, the investigating officer has made a categorical statement that in fact, there is no injury on the forehead of the victim and the said investigating officer was also present Court when the Court heard the matter of the co-accused on 26.6.2020 and therefore, she requested that the reason which has been assigned by the Court below is not just and proper. Ms. Chancheti further stated that irrespective of this, even looking to the nature of the allegations leveled against the present applicant and looking to the gravity of the offence, when the co-accused person has already been released on bail, there is no point in allowing the present applicant to remain under apprehension of arrest. In fact, if the injury certificate of the victim is produced on record, the Court would find out that there is no role played by the present applicant and in addition thereto, Ms. Sancheti has further submitted that the applicant is not a hardcore person nor he is having any criminal antecedent and as such, since the arrest has got a serious consequence, protection, as required, may be provided to the applicant.

(3.) As against the aforesaid submissions, learned APP Mr. J.K. Shah has made an attempt to oppose the present application on the ground that there is a specific assertion coming out from the record that present applicant- Moinkhan had already given a blow on the forehead of the complainant with iron role and as such, looking to the seriousness of the role, no parity be given to the applicant. With a view to produce the injury certificate on record, time was taken by learned APP from time to time. But, ultimately, when the matter is taken up for hearing, i.e. today, learned APP is unable to produce the injury certificate and has left the matter to the discretion of this Court.