DASHRATH RAJUBHAI SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 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 31.12.2018 passed by the learned Principal Judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc. Application No.8390 of 2018.

(2.) It is the case of the appellant that the FIR has been registered being I- C.R.No.145 of 2018 with Vadaj Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 323 , 143 , 147 , 149 , 339 , 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989. According to him, he has been made as accused in the said offence and he was arrested on 15.09.2018. According to him, he had preferred bail application for regular bail before the learned Principal Judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad being Criminal Misc. Application No.8390 of 2018 which came to be rejected vide order dated 31.12.2018. It is further stated that the Investigating Officer has filed the charge-sheet in respect of the aforesaid offences and it is registered as Special Atrocity Case No.96 of 2018. According to him, he has not committed the alleged offence and no prima facie case is made out against him. It is his say that the offence is mainly committed by the other accused. According to him, even if the presence of the appellant is there, by that fact only, he cannot be made an accused. It is contended that in all 23 co-accused have been enlarged on bail either by this Court or by the Sessions Court. According to him, his case may be considered on the ground of parity also. It is submitted that the FIR clearly discloses the fact that the complainant has filed the complaint against mob of 30 to 40 persons and hence, no prima facie case is made out against the present appellant. It is further submitted that the appellant is a young boy of 22 years and he has not having any type of criminal antecedent and he is ready and willing to cooperate in the trial. He has prayed to release him on regular bail.

(3.) Heard Mr.R. M. Chauhan, learned advocate for the appellant and Ms.Monali Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State. Though served, nobody appears on behalf of respondent No.2.