The object of anticipatory bail is that a person should not be harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy the personal vendetta of the complainant. Gujarat High Court
TITLE Chirag Prafulkumar Patel Versus State of Gujarat
Decided On September 21, 2023
2119 of 2023
CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr Hasmukh
INTRODUCTION-
The appellants fearing their arrest in connection with the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506(2), 143, and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860, as well as Section 3(2)(vi) of the Atrocity Act, have filed the current appeal under Section 14-A read with Section 18 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989).
FACTS OF THE CASE
The appellants claim that the complainant filed the FIR as a counterblast since another complaint was made against the complainant’s brother, that no such incident occurred, and that the appellants were wrongfully implicated in the crime. On the other hand, the complainant’s brother had abused young girls in the fine arts class, and an incident related to this occurred. In an effort to cover their tracks, the girls made up the entire story and filed the complaint. After the current appellants’ initial complaint was submitted, the complaint was late in coming. There isn’t even a hint of an attempt to offend the community on the surface. No specific part is given to the current appellants in the omnibus claims against the accused parties.
COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION
In contrast, the learned APP has vigorously opposed the current appeal and claimed that section 18 of the Atrocity Act forbids the consideration of the current appeal and that the current appellants are guilty of a prima facie offence. Regarding the claim that the current FIR is a counterblast to the complaint that the complainant’s brother filed, this is a matter of evidence and does not need to be addressed at this time because the FIR prima facie discloses the offence. As a result, it has been requested to dismiss the current appeal. Additionally, taking into account the claims made in the complaint, the appellants’ presence is necessary for the qualitative investigation, as well as custodial questioning. Due to this initial appearance of an active role on the part of the accused, a qualitative investigation is required.
The current appellants are accused of violating Sections 323, 504, 506(2), 143, and 149 of the Penal Code of 1860 as well as Section 3(2)(vi) of the Atrocity Act. Section 18 of the Atrocity Act forbids the use of discretion in the present appellants’ favour. After considering the aforementioned discussion, it can be concluded that the case at hand does not qualify for jurisdiction under Section 18 of the Atrocity Act because it is prima facie established that the present appellants were involved in the crime. Therefore, the current appeal is denied.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Steffi Desousa