Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/1794/2011 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 1794 of 2011
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 2984 of 2008
=========================================================
KARTIK
LALJIBHAI - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
THROUGH
JAIL for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR. KODEKAR, APP, for Respondent(s) : 1,
None
for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
Date
: 14/02/2011
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA)
1. Rule.
Mr. Kodekar, learned APP, appears and waives service of rule on
behalf of the respondent State of Gujarat.
2. Having
regard to the facts of the case, the application is taken up for
hearing.
3. By
filing instant application through jail authority, the
applicant-convict who, by judgement and order dated 31.1.2008
rendered in Sessions Case No. 45 of 2006 by learned Sessions Judge,
Navsari, has been convicted for the offences punishable under
Sections 307, 376 etc. of the Indian Penal Code, has prayed for
suspension of sentence and to release
him on bail during the pendency and final disposal of the above
numbered Criminal Appeal.
4. Having
considered the submissions advanced by Mr. Kodekar, learned APP and
upon perusal of the averments made in the application so also the
impugned judgement and order and the record of the case, it is seen
that earlier application seeking suspension of sentence and to
release the applicant on bail has been rejected vide order dated
10.2.2009 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1334 of
2009 by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court . Therefore, obviously,
this bail application, being successive bail application and since no
new ground is canvassed in this application for suspension of
sentence and to release the applicant on regular bail, cannot
entertained.
5. For
the foregoing reasons, the application lacks merit and the same is
rejected.
6. Rule
is discharged.
(A.M. KAPADIA, J)
(BANKIM N. MEHTA, J)
(pkn)
Top