Gujarat High Court High Court

Bhupatbhai vs State on 13 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Bhupatbhai vs State on 13 April, 2010
Author: H.B.Antani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/3016/2010	 2/ 4	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 3016 of 2010
 

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

 

BHUPATBHAI
MAGANBHAI LIMBASIYA & 16 - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
PRAVIN GONDALIYA for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 17. 
MR DEVANG VYAS, APP for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 13/04/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. This is an
application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure by the applicants who came to be arrested in connection
with CR No. I-9 of 2010 registered at Babara Police Station for the
offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326,
325, 504, 506(2), 403 of the IPC as well as Section 135 of the Bombay
Police Act.

2. Mr Pravin Gondaliya,
learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the applicants are
innocent persons and they are falsely implicated in the commission of
offence as narrated in the FIR at Annexure-A to the petition.
Considering the role attributed to each of the applicant, they
deserve to be enlarged on bail.

3. Mr Devang Vyas,
learned APP for the State, while opposing the bail application,
submitted that applicant Nos.1 to 5 were armed with deadly weapons
and assaulted the complainant and his son and that fact is reflected
even in the injury certificate. Considering the role attributed to
applicant Nos.1 to 5 as well as other applicants who also joined
hands in assaulting the complainant and his son Pravinbhai, no
discretionary relief be granted to the applicants and the application
deserves to be rejected out of hand.

4. I have heard Mr
Pravin Gondaliya, learned advocate for the applicants and Mr Devang
Vyas, learned APP for the State at length and in great detail. I have
considered the role attributed to the applicants as reflected in the
FIR as well as the police papers. The injury certificate produced by
the learned APP and the injuries sustained by the complainant as well
as his son Pravinbhai is perused by me. Taking into consideration the
aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and considering the
role of applicant Nos.1 to 5, although they deserves to be enlarged
on bail along with the other applicants, stringent terms and
conditions are required to be imposed on applicant Nos.1 to 5 while
enlarging them on bail.

5. 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-9 of 2010 registered at Babara 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] Applicant Nos.1 to 5

shall not enter in Amreli District during pendency of the trial,
except for marking presence and attending the trial;

[f] mark their presence
at the concerned police station twice in a month i.e. on every 1st
and 15th day of every English calendar month between 9.00
AM and 2.00 PM till the trial is over;

[g] 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;

[h] maintain law and
order.

6. 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.

7. Bail bond to be
executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.

8. 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.

9. Rule is made absolute
to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.

[H.B.ANTANI,
J.]

mrpandya

   

Top