Gujarat High Court High Court

Shubhnarayan vs State on 6 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Shubhnarayan vs State on 6 April, 2010
Author: H.B.Antani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCR.A/521/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 521 of 2010
 

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


 

SHUBHNARAYAN
SHANKARBHAI THAKUR - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
THROUGH
JAIL for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR DIVYESH SEJPAL ADDITIONAL PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 06/04/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

This
application is preferred by the applicant convict through the
Superintendent, Baroda Central Jail, Baroda with a prayer to grant
furlough leave.

Learned
APP Mr. Sejpal appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that in
the order passed by the Jail Authority, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad on
19.2.2010, it has been stated that if the applicant is granted
furlough leave, there is likelihood of breach of peace and as he is
involved in offence punishable under Sections 489 (A), (B) and (C),
furlough leave was refused. It is further observed in the order that
it would be open for the applicant to prefer an application after
lapse of six months.

Considering
the aforesaid aspect as well as the Police opinion, which is placed
for my perusal by the learned APP, I am of the view that the
application does not call for any interference. It would be open for
the applicant to move appropriate application after a period of six
months is over, before the Inspector General of Police.

With
this observation, present application does not call for any
interference. This application is rejected. Rule is discharged.

The
compilation given by the learned APP is ordered to be taken on record
of the case.

(H.B.ANTANI,
J.)

ynvyas

   

Top