PRATAPBHAI KANUBHAI KHACHAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Section 14 ?A of the Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 as well as under Section 439 r.w. Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is filed for regular bail in connection with the FIR being CR No.I ?34/2019 registered with Ranpur Police Station, Botad (Rural) for the offence punishable under Sections 302 , 394 , 504 , 506(2) , 427 , 143 , 147 , 148 , 149 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act r.w. Sections 3(1)(R)(5) and 3 (2)(5A) of the Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribe (Atrocity) Act.

(2.) The appellant has filed Criminal Misc. Application no.10 of 2020 before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge Atrocities, Botad u/s.439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 requesting to enlarge the appellant on regular bail on account of offence being registered as FIR being CR No.I ?34/2019 registered with Ranpur Police Station, Botad (Rural) for the offence punishable under Sections 302 , 394 , 504 , 506(2) , 427 , 143 , 147 , 148 , 149 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act r.w. Sections 3(1)(R)(5) and 3 (2)(5A) of the Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribe (Atrocity) Act, wherein the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge (Atrocity), Botad rejected the said application vide order dated 1st February 2020. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred the appeal u/s.14A(2) of the Atrocities Act.

(3.) Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the present appellant is wrongly involved in the offence by the Investigating Agency. He further submits that charge ?sheet is filed and nothing is found against the present appellant. That, the Sessions Court has failed to appreciate the post ?mortem report as the cause of death is due to multiple injuries. Looking to the F.I.R. There is no role attributed to the present appellant inflicting any injury to the deceased. As per the F.I.R., appellant was not present at the place of incident when it was occurred. Appellant is made accused in the present F.I.R. Only on the basis of the statement of the complainant and his family members. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the appellant to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Atrocities, Botad.