RAMABHAI PALABHAI SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocities Act" for short), the appellant has challenged the order dated 04.01.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.301/2020 by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Viramgam, whereby, the application filed by the appellant seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R.No.11192035200322/2020, registered at Mandal Police Station, Dist. Ahmedabad Rural, for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(g), 3(1)(f) and 3(2)(va) of the Atrocities Act, has been dismissed.

(2.) Heard Mr.S.P. Kotia, learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Krina Calla, learned APP for the respondent State and Mr.O.I. Pathan, learned advocate for the respondent No.2- original complainant.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is an innocent person and has not committed any offence. It is also submitted that no prima-facie case is made out against the appellant for an offence against the aforesaid Act and as such regardless of provisions of Section- 18 of the Act, the appellant is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the appellant belongs to Scheduled Caste and therefore, the provisions of the Atrocities Act would not be applicable. It is submitted that the offence was committed in the year 2008 and it is registered in the year 2020 i.e. after a period of 12 years the proceedings being initiated by the complainant, hence, on the ground of delay and considering the facts, prima-facie, it appears that the case of civil nature being given a colour of criminality which is nothing but abuse of process of law. That the only role of the appellant is that he had signed as a witness in the document, therefore, prima-facie, there is no evidence for commission of alleged crime by him. Under the circumstances, learned advocate for the appellant urged that the appellant may be granted anticipatory bail in the interest of justice.