UMANGBHAI VINODBHAI RAVAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 14(A) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 (hereinafter be referred to as "the Atrocity Act" for short) at the instance of the appellant- original accused for enlarging the appellant on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.I-82 of 2019 registered with Viramgam Rural Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 363 , 366 and 376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5(L), 6, 8, 11 and 12 of the Protection of Children Against Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 3(1)(w)(2) and 3(2) (5-A) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 (hereinafter be referred to as "the Atrocity Act" for short).

(2.) Heard learned advocate for the appellant, Ms.Monali Bhatt, learned APP for respondent no.1-State and Mr. Vicky Mehta, learned advocate for respondent no.2-complainant. Learned advocate for respondent no.2 has filed an affidavit which is taken on record.

(3.) It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellant that the appellant is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. That the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Viramgam is grossly unconstitutional, illegal, bad, improper, unjust, unreasonable, against the facts and circumstances and evidence on record, against the settled principles and propositions of law. It is further submitted that the appellant did not utter any word against the caste of the complainant. It is further submitted that the victim and the appellant were in love together since last three years and they were made intercourse by free will and consent and at the time of incident, the victim was aged about 17 years and 9 months and now the victim is adult and the story for denial to marry with the victim has been falsely created. Looking to the allegations made in the FIR, there is no single allegation against present appellant, which can attract the provisions of the Atrocity Act. Considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the appellant, the appellant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. It is requested by learned advocate for the appellant to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 31.12.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.392 of 2019 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Viramgam rejecting the prayer for releasing him on bail and to allow this appeal granting regular bail.