Gujarat High Court High Court

Devanbhai vs State on 11 February, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Devanbhai vs State on 11 February, 2011
Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/15864/2010	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 15864 of 2010
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6660 of 2007
 

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


 

DEVANBHAI
RASIKBHAI PAREKH & 2 - Applicants
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondents
 

=========================================================
Appearance : 
MS
BHAVIKA H KOTECHA for
Applicants:1 - 3. 
MS CM SHAH ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent: 1, 
None for Respondents :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 11/02/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

Rule.

Ms. Shah, learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of
respondent State. By consent, Rule is fixed forthwith.

The
applicants have taken out this application for seeking appropriate
relief, as though they have been enlarged on bail under the order of
this Court dated 16.10.2008 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.
6660 of 2007, there was a condition, under which, the passports of
the accused have been surrendered and the validity of the passports
are expiring on 25.03.2011 and therefore, appropriate directions be
issued. Learned advocate for the applicants has placed on record the
affidavits of applicants indicating in all three affidavits that
validity of their passports are expiring on 25.3.2011. The same is
taken on record. Learned advocate for the applicants submits that
other prayer with regard to permission to go abroad is not pressed
at this stage and seeks liberty to approach the appropriate court as
and when such requirement is arising and today, the present
application, therefore, is confined only to appropriate direction to
release the passports of applicants for the purpose of having it
renewed and as soon as the passports are renewed, she submits that
the same shall be again be surrendered to the appropriate court and
thereafter only, the appropriate application for seeking permission
to go out of India, if needed, would be made.

In
view of this, Ms. Shah, learned APP submits that Court may pass
appropriate order.

The
court has taken into consideration that the accused so far not
involved into any activities which may militate against release of
passports for the purpose of it being renew. The application, as
submitted by the counsel, is confined only to a direction with
regard to release of the passports of the applicants, which are
expiring on 25.3.2011. I am of the view that such a direction is
required to be granted and I pass the following order. The passports
of three applicants be released and be handed over to them for the
purpose of renewing them and the accused applicants shall file an
undertaking to this effect, which may be placed on the record of
this proceedings i.e. Criminal Misc. Application No. 15864 of 2010,
in the registry, with a copy to other side, that as soon as the
passport is received after it being renewed by the
applicants-accused, immediately, same shall be surrendered to the
competent court and thereafter, only in case, if there is a need of
moving out of India is arising, in case of any of the applicant or
all the applicants, then, separate application would be preferred to
the competent court. Breach of undertaking shall entail bare
consequences, which may include cancellation of bail.

With
this observation, Criminal Misc. Application is partly allowed. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted
today.

(S.R.BRAHMBHATT,
J.)

pallav

   

Top