Gujarat High Court High Court

Taherbhai vs State on 23 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Taherbhai vs State on 23 April, 2010
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/18422010/2010	 2/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 1842 of 2010
 

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


 

TAHERBHAI
ABBASBHAI PIPLODWALA - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
NIRAVR MISHRA for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR. H.L.JANI, ADDITIONAL
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent1 
========================================= 

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 23/04/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

The present
application has been filed by the Applicant accused under Section
439 of Criminal Procedure Code for grant of regular bail after the
charge sheet is filed.

The Applicant
accused is charged with having committed offence under Sections
489(A), (B), (C), (D), 120B, 201 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code,
for which complaint has been lodged being I-CR No. 100 of 2009 with
Godhra Town Police Station, District Panchmahal.

Learned Advocate Mr.
Nirav Mishra for the Applicant accused referred to the FIR and also
the material and submitted that the present application is filed
after the charge sheet as a successive bail application and earlier
Criminal Misc. Application No. 7206 of 2009 was rejected. However,
he submitted that almost about a year has passed, the trial has not
proceeded. He also submitted that the other co-accused having
similar role have been released as per the order passed in Criminal
Misc. Application No. 12789 of 2009 dated 4.12.2009 as well as
Criminal Misc. application No. 12001 of 2009 dated 14.10.2009. He
therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed.

Learned APP Mr.
H.L.Jani resisted the application and submitted that considering the
role and since it is a successive bail application, the present
application may not be entertained though he fairly stated that the
other co-accused have been released subsequently and also confirmed
that the trial has not commenced.

Having heard learned
Advocate Mr. Nirav Mishra for the Applicant accused and learned APP
Mr. H.L.Jani and having regard to the aforesaid circumstances,
including the fact that the trial has not commenced and the other
co-accused have been released as stated above, the present
application deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, the
present application stands allowed. The applicant Taherbhai
Abbasbhai Piplodwala is ordered to be released on bail in connection
with I-CR No. 100 of 2009 registered with Godhra Town Police
Station, District Panchmahal, on his executing a bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand), with one solvent 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 to try to
tamper or pressurize the prosecution witnesses or complainant in any
manner.

(c) not act in any
manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution.

(d) maintain law and
order and should cooperate the investigating officers.

(e) mark his presence
before Godhra Town Police Station on every 1st and 15th
day of calendar month between 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM till the trial
commences.

(f) furnish the
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
his residence without prior permission of the Court.

(g) surrender his
passport, if any, to the lower Court, within a week.

If breach of any of
the above conditions is committed, the concerned Sessions Judge will
be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.

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 permitted.

(Rajesh H.Shukla,J)

Jayanti*

   

Top