HEENABEN NAILESHBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Dipesh Soni, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Mrs. Krina Calla, learned APP for the respondent State. Though served, none appears for respondent No.2.

(2.) By this appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocities Act" for short), the appellants have challenged the order dated 03.04.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.1899 of 2021 by learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat, whereby, the application filed by the appellants seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C in the event of their arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R.No.I-11210004210623 of 2021, registered at Amroli Police Station, Dist. Surat, for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 294(b) & 114 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r) and 3(2)(v-a) of the Atrocities

(3.) It is the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence; that the applicants are in no manner the relatives of the complainant; that only allegations made against the appellants that they had advised the informant to get marry with the appellant No.1; that prima facie, no evidence on record so far as the allegations with respect to abuse words with name of her caste; that prima facie, no case is made out against the present appellants for the offences committed under the provisions of Atrocities Act; that the complainant left the firm of the appellants voluntarily as an employee on 19.07.2019 and since then the informant was not in contact with the appellants, and since then there was no occasion or reason on the part of the appellants to interfere in the matrimonial life of the informant, nor any alleged incident took place as connected by the complainant qua the present appellants; that very vague, general and sweeping allegations have been levelled against the present appellants and even if they are taken true without prejudice to the defence of the present appellants, no case of any nature is made out against them; that the impugned FIR is nothing but the sheer abuse of the process of law and has been filed with malafide motive to just to harass the appellants and by keeping wreak vengeance.