RAJAN BHARATBHAI RANA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. N.K. Majmudar, the learned advocate appearing for the appellant - applicant (original accused) and Mr. L.B. Dabhi, the learned APP appearing for the respondent - State.

(2.) By way of this appeal filed under Sec. 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act read with Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with F.I.R bearing CR.No. I-11210005220652 of 2022 registered with Athvalines Police Station, District: Surat City for offences punishable under Sec. 306 of the Indian Penal Code read with Ss. 3(1)(r) , 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v)(a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989.

(3.) Mr. N.K. Majmudar, the learned advocate appearing for the applicant would submit that the allegations in the FIR interalia being that the present applicant and the deceased being in a relationship and whereas, with the consent of the parents initially while it was decided that the applicant and the deceased were to get married, for some reason, since the applicant had decided not to get married with the deceased initially the deceased had attempted to commit suicide on 23/3/2022 and whereas, after the deceased had recovered again the parents of the deceased and parents of the applicant had got together where it is alleged that the present applicant had allegedly used some caste abusive terms against the deceased and her parents, which had led the deceased to commit the unfortunate act. Learned advocate Mr. Majnudar would submit that as such the fact that the present applicant and the deceased were in a relationship and the deceased and the present applicant deciding to get married, and whereas, the parents of the present applicant having consented for the same, would be enough material to show that the applicant or his parents never had any issue with regard to the caste status of the deceased and her family members. Learned advocate would submit that the present applicant being a young man aged around 26 years and in custody since 10/4/2022 and the investigation already having concluded, this Court may exercise its discretion to release the present applicant on regular bail.