BALUBEN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr.Vikas Nair appearing with learned Advocate Mr.Samir Gogda for the appellants, learned APP Mr.Raval for the respondent State and learned Advocate Mr.Mehul Mehta for respondent No.2.

(2.) By way of this appeal filed under Sec. 14A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act ,1989 read with Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the appellants pray for being released on anticipatory bail in connection with F.I.R. (Part-A) No.11192060220153 of 2022 registered with Viramgam Police Station, Ahmedabad (Rural), on 24/5/2022 for the offences punishable under Ss. 504 , 506(2) , & 114 of the Indian Penal Code , and under Ss. 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act ("Atrocities Act" for short).

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr.Nair for the appellants would submit that the FIR inter alia alleges offences punishable under Ss. 504 , 506(2) , & 114 of the Indian Penal Code , and under Ss. 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act . Learned Advocate Mr.Nair would submit that a bare perusal of the FIR would show that the incident in question had taken place at the residential house of the First Informant and whereas the same would not fall under the purview of "within public view" as being a necessary requirement for alleging offences punishable under Sec. 3(1)(r) and Sec. 3(1)(s) of the Atrocities Act. Learned Advocate Mr.Nair would further submit that insofar as offence punishable under Sec. 506(2) of the IPC, there is nothing in the FIR to show that the First Informant or her family members were alarmed on account of the threat given by the present appellants. Learned Advocate would further submit that the allegations of the First Informant as stated in the FIR, with regard to the harassment etc., on account of caste of the First Informant as could be made out from the objections filed by the First Informant before the learned Sessions Court, appear to be absolutely improbable in view of the fact that the First Informant is an elected member of Kariyala Gram Panchayat, more particularly the First Informant having been elected on General Category seat. Learned Advocate Mr.Nair would submit that having regard to the same, and considering that the First Informant is an elected representative it becomes clear that the present First Informant would not, in any manner, be alarmed on account of the threat allegedly administered by the appellants. Learned Advocate would draw the attention of this Court to a specific averment in the FIR that the First Informant and/or her son were not injured, in any manner whatsoever, on account of the incident in question as mentioned in the FIR. Learned Advocate Mr.Nair would further submit that there being no antecedents of the appellants having been involved herein before in any criminal activities, this Court may release the present appellants on anticipatory bail.