NAZIM Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Sec. 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at the instance of the appellant original accused against the order dated 05.02.2019 passed by the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in Criminal Misc. Application No.556 of 2019.

(2.) It is the case of the appellant that the FIR. has been registered being I - C.R.No.207 of 2018 with Kosamba Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504, 506(2) and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)2 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. According to him, on 18/19.11.2018, the complainant had some quarrel with one Mohmmad Hussain (accused No.1). That on 21.11.2018, the friend of the complainant called him and asked him to come at Dadri Faliyu to solve the quarrel which happened between Mohmmad Hussain and the complainant and, therefore, the complainant went there. It is also submitted that on going there, the present appellant ran towards the complainant for giving blow with an intention of killing him and while protecting himself, the complainant get hurt and injury on his left wrist which was cut off and on this basis, the complainant has filed the complaint against both the accused. According to him, he was arrested on 23.11.2018 and, thereafter, after filing of the charge-sheet, he has preferred bail application before the Sessions Court, Surat, which came to be rejected by the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat vide order dated 05.02.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.556 of 2019. It is also submitted by the appellant that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. According to him, no offence under the provisions of the Atrocity Act is made out and he is of very young age and is still studying and he is resident of Mangrol and there are no chances that the appellant will run away and he assures that he will cooperate with the investigating agency and will no temper with the evidence or try to influence and pressure the witnesses. It is further submitted by the appellant that the complainant has been discharged from the hospital after medical treatment and he was never in danger as alleged by him in the FIR. He has contended that no recovery or discovery of any muddamal has been recovered from the appellant and the co-accused has also been enlarged on bail by the learned trial Court. He has also contended that the investigation is over and the charge-sheet has been filed and, therefore, no further investigation is required. He has prayed to release him on bail.

(3.) Heard Mr.K. K. Desai, learned advocate for the appellant, Ms.Moxa Thakkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 State and Mr.Bomi Shethna, learned advocate for respondent No.2.