Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/7961/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 7961 of 2008
=====================================================
SARABEN,WIFE
OF SIDIK MITHU HAJAM - Applicant
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent
=====================================================Appearance
:
MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA for the
Applicant.
MS MANISHA L. SHAH, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
the Respondent.
=====================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 22/07/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. RULE.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Manisha L. Shah waives
service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State. In the facts and
circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for hearing today.
2. This
is an application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure seeking regular bail of the petitioner in connection with
C. R. bearing No. I-65 of 2008 filed at Adipur Police Station for the
offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477 and
120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned
Advocate Mr. P. S. Gondaliya for the petitioner submitted that
considering the nature of the offences in which the petitioner is
involved and it is concerning civil dispute, it is a fit case to
release the petitioner on regular bail.
4. Learned
Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Manisha L. Shah submitted that
considering the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of
offences and the manner in which it is committed, the petition
deserves to be rejected.
5. Having
heard learned Counsel of both the sides and on perusal of the
averments made in the application, the FIR produced at Annexure-A to
the petition and the order passed by the learned Judge in Regular
Civil Suit No. 83 of 2007, the petitioner is booked for the offences
punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477 and 120B of
the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner
made some alteration in the Will and committed the said offences.
The civil litigation between the parties is also pending before the
concerned Court. In view of the above, without going into the merits
of the case, I am inclined to exercise my discretion.
6. For
the foregoing reasons, the petition is allowed. The
petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection with C.R.
No. I-65 of 2008 filed at Adipur Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477 and 120B of
the Indian Penal Code on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten
Thousand Only] with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the Trial Court and subject to the conditions that she shall:
[a] not
take undue advantage of her liberty or abuse her liberty;
[b] not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
[c] surrender
her 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] furnish
the present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and
also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not
change her residence without prior permission of this Court; and,
[f] maintain
law and order.
7. 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.
8. Bail
bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try
the case.
9. 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 petitioner on bail.
10. Rule
is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.
[H.
B. ANTANI, J.]
/shamnath
Top