JAYESHKUMAR RAGHUBHAI DANGER Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed seeking anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR, being C.R. No.11214023200060 of 2020 registered with Kadodara Police Station, Surat (Rural) for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147 , 323 , 504 , 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(R)(S)(Z) , 3(2) and 5A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 2016.

(2.) In this proceedings, though served, respondent No.2 has chosen not to appear before the Court and despite having been given enough accommodation, even today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, nobody has appeared on behalf of the respondent No.2 nor she has personally remained present. Hence, the matter is taken up for hearing.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Rushabh R. Shah appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the appellant is an innocent person and has been wrongly arraigned in the prosecution. It is contended that in fact, the complainant has made out a false case against the present appellant since the appellant and other society people were objecting against her bootlegging activities. There is a gross delay in filing the complaint as well. On account of the bootlegging activity of the complainant, surrounding people are also objecting to the same and there is a tendency that as and when such objection is being raised, a threat is given of involving one way of the other in the complaint. Hence, the appellant being innocent person may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Additionally, it has also been submitted that the appellant is a permanent resident of the area, is working as Multiple-purpose Health Worker in Health Department of the Government of Gujarat and is not likely to misuse the liberty and if anticipatory bail is not granted, there are serious consequences upon the future career of the appellant. Hence, looking to the overall circumstance, the request of the appellant may be considered. For the purpose of substantiating his request, learned advocate has drawn the attention of this Court to several documents which are attached to this appeal, to point out that the present complainant has indulged herself in bootlegging activity of selling liquor illegally without any license and has created a serious unhealthy atmosphere in the entire area. Learned advocate has also drawn the attention of this Court to at least two FIRs lodged against her, i.e. the respondent No.2, for committing the offence of selling liquor illegally and the newspaper reports are also attached to the appeal. Hence, overall circumstance may kindly be considered for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant. Further, it has been submitted that the appellant is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to impose in the event of granting anticipatory bail to the appellant.