RANJITBHAI PARSHOTTAMBHAI OAD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal is filed under Section 14(A)(3) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989) for seeking regular bail in connection with the FIR, being C.R. No.I-91 of 2016 registered with Prantij Police Station, Sabarkantha for the offences punishable under Sections 376 , 363 , 366 , 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 3(i), 3(XI) of the Prevention of Atrocities Act read with Section 11(iv)(vi) , 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences and Harassment Act (POCSO Act).

(2.) In this appeal, originally, the Court was pleased to issue notice on 19.6.2020 and later on, vide order dated 7.7.2020, the complainant was ordered to be joined and draft amendment in the cause title was permitted to be carried out and upon newly added party, notice was issued. Subsequently, on 20.7.20210, when the matter had come up on board for hearing, an attention was drawn that returnable date was required to be extended and accordingly, the same was extended upto 28.7.2020. Vide order darted 28.7.2020, the respondent No.2 was also permitted to serve through electronic mode and then on 4.8.2020, when the matter again came up for consideration, it was brought to the notice of the Court that though served, the respondent No.2- complainant has chosen not to appear. Hence, as a last chance, time was granted and the matter was kept on 13.8.2020. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, neither the respondent No.2 nor any learned advocate representing him has appeared in the hearing on video conference and as such, under this set of circumstance, the matter was taken up for hearing.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Hemant Makwana appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the appellant is not guilty of any offence, he is an innocent person and on account of love and affection, both have decided to marry but that action of the appellant and the victim was made the subject matter of the complaint. Mr. Makwana has submitted that out of their relationship, two children have been born; one daughter named Puja and another daughter named Aarti. In fact, the appellant has not committed any offence as alleged and in respect of the age, there is a serious discrepancy but since the same is the matter of trial, at this stage, without expressing anything on such, at least, the appellant be released on regular bail. Aforesaid children have been born on 28.12.2018 and 9.10.2019. The appellant in the present situation is languishing in jail since November 2019 and his presence is very much needed in his family. It has been submitted that, now the charge-sheet has already been submitted and if the appellant is released on bail, there is no likelihood of any prejudice to the case of the prosecution and the appellant is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions which this Court deems fit to impose. It has further been submitted that learned Trial Court which has not examined the aforesaid aspects and has adopted too technical approach and as a result of this, by imposing suitable conditions, the appellant may be enlarged on bail.