GOPALSINH @ DEVUSINH SURAJSINH ... Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Public Prosecutor waives service. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

(2.) This application is filed seeking bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 272 , 273 , 420 , 486 , 488 , 114 of the Indian Penal Code for which FIR came to be registered at C.R. No.I-30 of 2017 with Dantiwada Police Station.

(3.) Having considered the rival contentions, it is startling to note that the petitioner has been put behind the bars as under-trial prisoner only on the ground that he, by letting out the room situated in his field for a higher rent to the main accused Arjan and by not informing the police about the illegal activities in the said room, has committed offence by conspiring with other accused persons; who are alleged to have misbranded and adulterated the commodity Ghee of certain make. Nowhere in the complaint, the investigating officer charges the petitioner having indulged into the act of misbranding or adulterating the said commodity. It is painstaking to state that despite such superficial and shallow allegations, even the court below compromised with the valuable right of liberty guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 21 of the Constitution of India by not admitting him to bail on the ground that the petitioner is involved in "a serious offence". Though it was pointed out to the trial court that charge-sheet was already filed and necessary material has already been collected, still without any legal justification, it proceeded to bestow the petitioner with a pre- trial conviction; blissfully ignorant of the settled legal position that the denial of bail should not amount to a pre-trial conviction.