JOHNSON SEBASTIAN SIDDIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Kishan R. Chakwawala for the applicants and learned APP Mr. L.B Dabhi for the respondent State.

(2.) The applicants apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No. 11191062220401 of 2022 registered with L. Traffic Police Station, Ahmedbad dtd. 1/6/2022 for the offences punishable under Ss. 332 , 186 , 504 , 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sec. 177 , 194 B and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act and also under Sec. 333 of the Indian Penal Code which was subsequently added vide report dtd. 13/6/2022 has preferred this application for being released on anticipatory bail.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Chakwawala would take this Court through the allegations leveled in the FIR and whereas it is attempted to be stated by learned advocate Mr. Chakwawala that while there were total four persons who were sitting in the car and whereas as per the FIR, the incident occurred when the first informant i.e a traffic police personnel, had stopped the vehicle and asked for a fine and whereas scuffle was started at the behest of two other accused, who have been released on regular bail. Learned advocate Mr. Chakwawala would submit that the present applicants were seated in the back seat of the car had not indulged in any of the fight, which is described in the FIR. Learned advocate Mr. Chakwawala would further submit that as such, it was the present applicants, who had been assaulted by the police personnel and whereas the present applicants more particularly applicant no.2 being required to be admitted in the hospital and remain under observation for a period of 7 days and whereas learned advocate Mr. Chakwawala would also take this Court through the discharge certificate as well as the photographs of the applicant no.2 to further strengthen his argument. Learned advocate Mr. Chakwawala would further submit that in case of the other accused who according to learned advocate Mr. Chakwawala had a more serious role to play, they had been released by the learned Magistrate, upon production and whereas after such release, since the Investigating Officer has filed a report with the learned Magistrate, for addition of an offence punishable under Ss. 333 of the Indian Penal Code, therefore, the possibility of the present applicants receiving the same treatment, is completely negated. Learned advocate would submit that as such the injury certificate of the first informant, does not reflect any grievous injury suffered by the first informant. Learned advocate would submit that the serious offence has been alleged after filing of the FIR only with a purpose to ensure that the applicants do not get bail at the stage of production itself.