Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/12617/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 12617 of 2010
=========================================================
PRAKASH
ASHWINBHAI PATEL - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
NV GANDHI for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR RC KODEKAR, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
Date
: 20/10/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. Rule.
Mr. RC Kodekar, Ld. Addl. Public Prosecutor appears and waives the
service of Rule on behalf of opponent – State.
2. The applicant filed this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for obtaining regular bail in connection with C.R. No. I-366/2010 registered with Sabarmati Police Station, regarding offences punishable under sections 465, 420, 467, 471, 408, 511 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code [for short ‘the IPC’].
3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.
4. Mr. NV Gandhi, Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the bare perusal of the FIR would suggest that no incriminating role was played by the petitioner. Even considering the FIR, it emerges that the alleged work order which co-accused R V Parmar handed-over to the petitioner, was only attempted to deliver and so far as this petitioner is concerned, the role played by him was only like a messenger and was not at all connected regarding the contents of the work order. It is further submitted that even as per the prosecution case, there was an attempt to commit offence and, therefore, section 511 of the IPC has been incorporated in the FIR. It is, therefore, submitted that the application may be allowed.
5. Per contra, Mr. RC Kodekar, Ld. APP for the opponent – State opposed this application and submitted that since the investigation is in progress, the application may be dismissed.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both the sides and considering the FIR, so also the order passed by the Sessions Court rejecting the bail application of the petitioner and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application preferred under sec. 439 of the Cr. P.C., deserves to be granted.
7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with C.R. No. I-366/2010 registered with Sabarmati Police Station, for the offences alleged against him in this application on his executing bond of Rs.5,000/= (Rupees Five Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the lower Court and subject to the conditions that he shall,
a) not take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty;
b) not try to tamper or pressurize the prosecution witnesses or complainant in any manner;
c) maintain law and order and should co-operate the investigating officers;
d) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
e) not leave the local limits of State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the concerned trial Judge.
f) furnish the address of his residence to the I.O. and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court;
g) surrender his Passport, if any, to the lower court within a week.
8. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the concerned trial Judge will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
9. Bail before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It would be open to the trial court concerned to give time to furnish the solvency certificate if prayed for.
Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
[ J.C. UPADHYAYA, J. ]
* Pansala.
Top