RAJAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-2020-12-209
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on December 16,2020

RAJAN Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties through video conferencing.
(2.) This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with FIR registered as C.R.No.11210025200343 of 2020 with Limbayat Police Station, Surat City for the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 307 , 324 , 323 , 143 , 144 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 427 , 294(B) , 504 , 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.
(3.) Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the allegations made against the applicant are vague and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. He has further submitted that the applicant has been arrested on 05.02.2020 and has been incarcerated since then. He has also submitted that the present applicant has not played any main role in the commission of the alleged offence of murder of the complainant. He has submitted that in fact it is merely alleged in the charge-sheet that the applicant was standing away apart from the spot of the quarrel and that the applicant is merely found to provoke other co- accused to only cause damage to the complainant's property. He has submitted that the applicant is nowhere in the investigation, found to have either inflicted knife blow to the complainant himself or have provoked other co-accused persons to cause death of the complainant. He has also submitted that no evidence found on record which shows that the present applicant was personally involved in actual commission of offence. 3.1 Learned advocate for the applicant has further submitted that considering the statement of the witnesses recorded during the course of investigation, it can clearly be made out that the person, who actually inflicted knife blows on the body of the complainant, was the one wearing red shirt who, later on, during the course of investigation, was found out to be one Dipak @ Dipu Pawan Pande (original accused No.4). Thus, he has submitted that the present applicant has never been personally involved in the actual commission of the alleged offence, nor there are any statement of witnesses incriminating the applicant of provoking other co-accused to cause death of the complainant. 3.2 Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that in fact, the only role played by the applicant was merely provoking other co-accused to cause damage to the complainant's property.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.