Gujarat High Court High Court

Mohd vs State on 13 May, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Mohd vs State on 13 May, 2011
Author: Ravi R.Tripathi,&Nbsp;Mr.Justice P.P.Bhatt,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/6366/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6366 of 2011
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 986 of 2007
 

 
=========================================================

 

MOHD.
AJGARALI MOHD. VAJIRALI - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
THROUGH
JAIL for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
Mr.J.M. PANCHAL, ADDL SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
for Respondent(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 2, 
MR YN RAVANI
for Respondent(s) :
3, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 13/05/2011 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI
R.TRIPATHI)

The
present application is filed by the convict praying for temporary
bail and/ or furlough. The application is dated 30.04.2011. It was
forwarded by the Jail authorities to the High Court by letter dated
01.05.2011. It was received by the High Court on 03.05.2011.

2. The
learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor pointed out that
earlier this very convict had filed an application being Criminal
Misc. Application No.3706 of 2011 for temporary bail. The same was
considered by this Court by this Court and was dismissed by a
detailed order dated 25.04.2011.

The
learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor invited attention of
the Court to the fact that the very convict has filed an application
through an advocate being Criminal Misc. Application No.1720 of 2011.
The same was not pressed by the counsel on 09.05.2011. The same was
disposed of by the following order:

“1.0 Learned
advocate Mr. Khalid G. Shaikh states that he has instructions not to
press this application at this stage. He states that the application
accordingly be disposed of.

2.0 The
application is disposed of as not pressed.”

3. The
aforesaid facts show that the convict is filing successive
application on the same grounds. Hence no case is made out for grant
of relief as prayed for. Hence this application is dismissed.

(RAVI
R. TRIPATHI, J.)

(P.P.

BHATT, J.)

karim

   

Top