Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/140/2010 2/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 140 of 2010
=========================================================
PARSUBHAI
KALIYABHAI VAHONIYA & 1 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MA MEMON FOR MR ARIF A SHEKH
for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR UA TRIVEDI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 09/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
This
application is preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with FIR registered as
CR No.I 133 of 2009 with Limkheda Police Station, for the offence
punishable under Sections 143,365, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
Learned
advocate Mr. M.A. Memon appearing for Mr A.A. Shaikh for the
applicants submitted that considering the role attributed to the
applicants which can be seen from the FIR at Annexure:A to the
application, both the applicants were in Jeep Car and had not
participated in the commission of offence along with main accused.
Considering the role played by the applicants, they deserve to be
enlarged on bail.
Learned
APP Mr. U.A. Trivedi, representing the opponent State, while opposing
the bail application, submitted that the applicants are involved in
the commission of offence punishable under sections 143, 365, 302 and
34 of IPC. Considering the role attributed to the applicants and the
manner in which they have aided and abetted the other accused in the
commission of offence punishable under Sec.302 of IPC, no lenient
view be taken in the matter and the application does not call for
interference and deserves to be dismissed.
I have
heard Mr. M.A.Memon for Mr. A.A. Shaikh, learned advocate for the
applicants and Mr. U.A. Trivedi, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor at length and in great detail. I have also perused the
averments made in the application. Considering the role attributed to
the applicants which is reflected in the FIR at Annexure:A to the
application, provisions of Sections 143, 365, 302 and 34 of IPC as
well as quantum of punishment etc., I am of the view that the
applicants are required to be enlarged on regular bail, without
discussing the evidence in detail.
In the
facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and
the applicants are ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection with
CR No. I 133 of 2009 registered at Limkheda Police Station on
executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each [Rupees ten thousand only] with
one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court and subject to the conditions that they shall:
[a] not
take undue advantage of their liberty or abuse their liberty;
[b] not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
[c] surrender
their passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week;
[d] not
leave the State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the
Sessions Court concerned;
[e] mark
their presence at the concerned police station on any day of first
week of every English calendar month between 9.00 AM and 2.00 PM.
till the trial is over;
[f] furnish
the present address of their residence to the I.O. and also to the
Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change their
residence without prior permission of this Court;
[g] maintain
law and order.
If
breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions
Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or to take appropriate
action in the matter.
Bail
bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try
the case.
At the
trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of
preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this
Court while enlarging the applicants on bail.
Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct
service is permitted.
[H.B.
Antani, J.]
pirzada/-
Top