Gujarat High Court High Court

Shaileshkumar vs State on 10 October, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Shaileshkumar vs State on 10 October, 2011
Author: Z.K.Saiyed,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/14293/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 14293 of 2011
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 13891 of 2011
 

In
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 13253 of 2011
 

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

 

SHAILESHKUMAR
BALSINH ZALA - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
PARTY-IN-PERSON
for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR KL PANDYA, APP for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 10/10/2011 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Rule.

Mr. K. L. Pandya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives
service of Rule on behalf of the State of Gujarat.

2. The
applicant-party-in-person has filed this application for extension of
temporary bail on the ground of treatment of his son and father.
Earlier this Court has extended the temporary bail vide order dated
30/9/2011 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.13891 of 2011 in
Criminal Misc. Application No.13253 of 2011 in Criminal Misc.
Application No.12642 of 2011.

3. Heard
learned APP appearing for the respondent State, gone through the
averments made in the application and perused the documents produced
on record before the Court.

4. Present
applicant has not produced cogent evidence to show the illness of
father and son. I have verified last order passed by this Court
extending the temporary bail also. Sufficient time has been granted
by this Court to the accused. Now, there is no cogent reason in the
application for extension. The application has no substance and the
same deserves to be dismissed. The same is therefore, dismissed.
Rule is discharged.

(Z.K.SAIYED,
J.)

(ila)

   

Top