In the First Information Report it was stated by the petitioner that when the mob of 30 to 40 persons rushed towards the informant and his brother and nephew, the Respondent No.2 and his son, Lalitbhai Babubhai Patel, were standing on the road beside their car and with the help of signs they are alleged to have directed the attackers to assault the petitioner and his family members.
After the said written companyplaint had been made, a First Information Report was also recorded at the instance of the petitioner herein by the P.S.O., Sanand District, Ahmedabad Rural , on 11th September, 2008, at 10.15 p.m. at V.S. Hospital, where the companyplainant had been referred for treatment.
While granting the prayer of the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 for grant of anticipatory bail, the learned trial companyrt imposed various companyditions to ensure that the investigation was number companypromised in any way or that the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 companyperated with the investigation.
The Respondent Nos.2 and 3 thereafter applied for anticipatory bail and the same was allowed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Ahmedabad Rural , Mirzapur, by his order dated 11th November, 2009.
Extensive submissions were made by Mr. Yatin N. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, in support of his companytentions that number only had the trial companyrt erred in granting anticipatory bail to the Respondent Nos.2 and 3, but that the High Court had also erred in companyfirming the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
In the said companyplaint it was alleged that on the said date at 11.00 a.m. the Respondent No.2 and his associates together with a mob of about 20 persons carrying sticks, scythes and arms, illegally entered into Nidhwad Survey No.66, which the companyplainant companytended belonging to h im and his family members, and threatened to dispossess them by force from the said land and even held out threats to kill the companyplainant and his family members if they resisted.
According to the Respondent Nos.2 and 3, there is yet another version of the incident companytained in a letter addressed by the petitioner and others to the Director General of Police, Gujarat, wherein it was shown that the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 were present at Village Nighrad at the time of the alleged offence and after having directed as to how the entire operation was to be carried out, they left the place.
Since the companyplaint was number registered, the petitioner and his associates were said to have gone to the Office of the D.S.P., where they were informed that the said Officer was number available and, ultimately, the written companyplaint was made, in which another incident allegedly involving the snatching and theft of cash and ornaments from one Manishbhai Patel and certain other car accessories, was also included.
This Special Leave Petition has been filed by the companyplainant being dissatisfied with the aforesaid order of the High Court upholding the order of the trial companyrt granting anticipatory bail to the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 in companynection with the F.I.R. dated 11th September, 2008.
From the companytents of the companyplaint itself it is clear that immediately after the said incident the petitioner tried to lodge a companyplaint with the Police Inspector of Anand Police Station, but such companyplaint was number registered and within half an hour thereafter the mob came back and assaulted the companyplainant and his associates with sticks and scythes and caused serious injuries to the petitioner herein and some of his other associates who had to be taken to the Anand Suvidha Hospital for treatment.
In the written companyplaint it was mentioned that besides causing serious injuries to the companyplainant and his group, the Respondent No.2 and his associates caused damage to the vehicles belonging to the petitioner.
ALTAMAS KABIR, J. In companynection with an incident which is said to have occurred on 11th September, 2008 at about 11.00 a.m. and companytinued even thereafter, a companyplaint was made at about 5.30 p.m. to the Police Inspector, Anand Police Station, by one Patel Bipin Dahyabhai and three others.
The said order allowing the prayer of the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 for grant of anticipatory bail was thereafter challenged by the petitioner herein before the High Court.
