Zahir Abbas Shabu Bayad v. State of Gujarat

Sammed AkiwateCase SummaryLeave a Comment

Zahir Abbas Shabu Bayad v. State of Gujarat

Zahir Abbas Shabu Bayad v. State of Gujarat
In the High Court of Gujarat
Cri. Misc. App. (For Regular Bail) 14055/2014
Before Justice A.J. Desai
Decided on September 05, 2014

Relevancy of the case: Bail application in a case involving spreading of communal hatred through Facebook and WhatsApp

Statutes & Provisions Involved

  • The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66A)
  • The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 439)
  • The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 120(B), 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 333, 332, 337, 353, 186, 341, 435)
  • The Damages to Public Property Act, 1984 (Section 3, 7)
  • The Gujarat Police Act, 1951 (Section 135)

Relevant Facts of the Case

  • Naufil Latif, resident of Bhuj lodged an FIR with the ‘B’ Division Police Station, Bhuj City for the offences punishable under Section 295(a) of the IPC read with Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 alleging that a message in filthy language with regard to hurting the feelings of the Muslim community was circulated on mobile through WhatsApp and Facebook.
  • It was found that Bhalesh Gadhavi, resident of Taluka Mandavi, District Bhuj published the said filthy message. Therefore, the police arrested him and brought to the police station.
  • On 27.07.2014, people of Muslim community surrounded the police station. Police used tear gas but the mob did not disperse. Hence, it resorted to lathi-charge but the mob became violent, damaging the public property. Police had to fire shots to disperse the mob. A few people from the mob were arrested.

Opinion of the Bench

  • As far as the injuries are sustained by the police personnel, the medical certificates issued by G.K. General Hospital, Bhuj-Kutch show that no serious injuries were sustained by any of the injured persons and none of the injured persons had sustained a fracture on any part of the body.
  • The background of the incident, the injuries sustained by the police personnel and the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the various decisions have been considered. The Court has to consider the possibility of repeating of offence, tampering with the evidence, jumping out the bail, threatening the witnesses etc.

Final Decision

  • The application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *