Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/6715/2008 5/ 5 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6715 of 2008
=========================================================
HARISH
SHAKIL AHMED ANSARI & 1 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
KHALID G SHAIKH for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR SP Hasurkar, Addl.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH
Date
: 11/11/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. The
petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with CR No.I-01 of
2006 by Anti Terrorist Police station, Ahmedabad for the offences
punishable under sections 17 to 20, 23(1), 38, 39 of Prevention of
Unlawful Activities (Amendments) Act, 2004, under section 120(B),
121(A) 122, 123 of IPC, under section 25 (1) (A), 27 and 29 of Arms
Act and under section 4 of the Explosive Substance Act, filed this
application seeking their release on bail.
2. It
is alleged in the complaint that the present petitioners along with
other co-accused, conspired with each other, at the instance of ISI
Agents of Pakistan and in collusion with Terrorist Organisations such
as Jaish-e-Mohammad, Lashkar-e-Toiba etc., with a view to disturb
peace and tranquility of India, decided to explode bomb at crowded
places. As members of the aforesaid organisations, they were getting
huge amount of money and taken delivery of arms and explosive
substances and by that committed the crime by taking active part in
commission of the offence. It is also pertinent to note that the
accused persons had purchased electric circuits for making time
bombs. During the investigation, it is revealed that the present
applicants are members of the banned organisation, SIMI.
3. Heard
the learned advocate for the petitioners and the learned APP for the
respondent-State. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the
petitioners that the charge sheet has already been filed. The
petitioners are in jail since December, 2003. The complaint has been
filed on 3.2.2006. It is submitted by him that during the
commission of the alleged offence, both the petitioners were in jail
and therefore, the question of involvement of the petitioners in
committing the crime does not arise. It is also submitted by him
that the trial is already commenced and from the evidence of the
witnesses nothing has come out to connect the present petitioners
with the crime in question. He has submitted that in case of
Jaideep Patel, accused was sentenced to suffer 5 years imprisonment
and he has already completed 5 years in jail. It is also submitted
by him that in Nehrunagar blast case, the present petitioners and all
other accused were acquitted by the Sessions Court. The co-accused
is also released on bail by the Hon’ble the Apex Court and so this
application deserves to be allowed.
4. Mr
SP Hasurkar, learned APP submitted that the trial in the present case
is already commenced and likely to be completed within a short time
and when the present petitioners are involved in such a serious crime
which is committed against the interest of the Nation, this
application deserves to be dismissed.
5. This
court has gone through the order passed by the trial court as well as
the complaint and copy of the deposition of the witnesses recorded
during the trial. The learned trial Judge, after considering all
the aspects of the case on record including the seriousness of the
offence and the cases on which reliance was placed by the learned
advocate for the petitioners, has decided the bail application of the
present petitioners. It is rightly observed by the learned Judge
while deciding the bail application that, if the trial is in
progress, the court cannot evaluate the evidence of the witnesses and
the evidence can only be discussed while delivering final judgment.
It is also pertinent to note that all the witnesses were examined by
the trial court during the trial and only the Investigating Officer
is required to be examined and thus, the trial is likely to be
completed within a very short period.
6. In
view of the above, without going into the merits of the case, taking
into consideration the gravity of the offence and also the fact that
the trial is almost over and that within a short period the trial
will be completed, in the opinion of this court, these petitioners
cannot be released on bail and this application deserves to be
dismissed. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. The
learned Sessions Judge is directed to complete the trial by keeping
the hearing of the case on day-to-day basis, as early as possible
preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt
of this order.
Rule
is accordingly discharged.
[M.D.
SHAH, J.]
msp
Top