NIKUNJ Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed under sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with the FIR No. 11205043210460 of 2021 registered with "B" Division Police Station, Bhuj-Kutch for offences punishable under Sec. 221 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 328 , 465 , 468 , 471 , 201 , 120B of IPC and Ss. 42 , 43 , 45 (12) of the Prison Act.

(2.) Mr. Zubin Bharda, learned advocate with Mr. Jabuawala for the applicant states that the allegations against the present applicant along with other co-accused is under Sec. 221 of the IPC along with other allied Sec. 223 of the IPC of escaping from confinement or custody negligently suffered by public servant by administering intoxicating wholesome drug with the offence of forgery for the purpose of cheating with the allegation of criminal conspiracy and causing of disappearance of the evidence. Mr. Bharda submits that the present applicant was shifted from Palara jail to G.K. General Hospital for treatment on 26/3/2021 and was admitted as an indoor patient under police escort and the PSI intimated the complainant that the applicant was missing from his bed and not found within the hospital premises. Mr. Bharda, referring to the medical papers of the applicant, submits that since long he was under medical treatment and as suffering from Cancer, he was taking treatment from Gujarat Cancer Research Institute and often under the police escort, was taken to the medical hospital for treatment. Mr. Bharda submits that he was not aware of any of the acts of the co-accused. He states that some allegation is made of administrating juice and allegation is that the co-accused had taken the present applicant along with them in I20 car and Swift car from G.K. General Hospital. Mr. Bharda submits that the present applicant was also put under influence of some intoxicating article and was not even knowing about the intention of the co- accused who had carried him to Nainital. Mr. Bharda submits that there is nothing on record which suggest criminal conspiracy since the applicant was in high security prison cell which is reflected in the statement of the Jail Superintendent and there was no such arrangement in the jail to allow any visitors to see him in the jail premises. Mr. Bharda, referring the punishment under Sec. 223 of escaping from confinement or custody negligently suffered by public servant submits that at the most the applicant will be punished for a term which may extend to 2 years or with fine or with both and after registration of the FIR, he is in jail under this offence for the last one year and six months. He further submits that the other co-accused had been granted bail.

(3.) Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned APP submits that the applicant and the co-accused in connivance with each other hatched criminal conspiracy and that he was taken away from the custody of the police from the hospital and CCTV footage reflects the same and the vehicles were also noted and the applicant willingly accompanied the co-accused and they were found in Nainital. He submits that the very intention of the co-accused was to make the applicant run away from trial under GUJCTOC and other offences registered against him and thus, urges to reject the application.