GAMBHIRSINH ASHABHAI SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present appeal filed under Sec. 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 read with Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure Code against the order of framing charge in Special Atrocity Case No. 67 of 2018 below Ex. 11 dtd. 21/8/2021 during the operation of interim relief granted by this court on 24/10/2018 in Special Criminal Application No. 9244 of 2018.

(2.) Heard learned advocate for the appellant and learned APP for the respondent no.1 and 2.

(3.) It was submitted by learned advocate for the appellant that framing of charge itself is bad in the eyes of law as the same is in violation of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court on 24/10/2018. That the learned trial court as well as prosecution have not bothered to take into consideration the order of this court which is purely in protective nature and proceeded to frame charge against the present appellant which is nothing but deliberate violation on the part of the prosecution. That, in spite of protective order in favour of the appellant, the respondent no.2 chosen to file charge sheet against the present appellant in gross violation of the order dtd. 24/10/2018. That the respondent no.2 was aware that the appellant was protected by this court however he preferred to ignore the order of this Hon'ble Court which is nothing but willful and deliberate act on his part to laid charge sheet against the present appellant. That, from the bear reading of charge sheet papers, now a whisper about single piece of evidence available in the entire charge sheet papers. On the contrary, the appellant was shown as witness while drawing panchnama of recovery of vehicle as the said vehicle was in the name of present appellant. Except this, there is nothing in entire charge sheet papers which prima facie suggest to frame charge against the present appellant. That prosecution has failed to bring any evidence which in any manner, connect the present appellant with the commission of the crime and learned trial court has not even taken a pain to look into the records as to whether there is any oral/documentary evidence which in any manner connect the appellant with the alleged incident of crime and proceeded to accept the request of prosecution and framed the charge which is ex-facie illegal and against the settled legal proposition of law. Thus, it was submitted by learned advocate for the appellant to allow present appeal.