Gujarat High Court High Court

Santoshkumar vs State on 18 January, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Santoshkumar vs State on 18 January, 2011
Author: K.M.Thaker,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/13276/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 13276 of 2010
 

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

 

SANTOSHKUMAR
@ SANTOSH LANGADO SHAITANSINH TOMAR - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
KAMAL M SOJITRA for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
MS MANISHA SHAH APP for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
		
	

 

Date
: 18/01/2011 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1. This
is a successive bail application. Mr.Kamal Sojitra, learned advocate
for the applicant has submitted that the other co-accused, all of
them, have been arrested.

2. However,
learned APP has submitted that one of the co-accused is still not
arrested and is absconding.

3. Ms.Manisha
Shah, learned APP for the respondent has further submitted that the
trial has already begun and it is in progress towards completion.
However, the learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP
are not certain about the number of witnesses, who have been examined
and/or are yet to be examined.

4. In
any case, since the trial has already begun and according to the
information of the learned APP, one of the accused is still not
arrested and having regard to the nature of the offence, this Court
is not inclined to entertain the application at this stage.

5. However,
the request of the learned advocate for the petitioner is that the
learned Trial Court may be requested to expedite the trial in view of
the fact that the trial has already begun. Therefore, it is hoped
that the learned Trial Court would make endeavor to complete the
trial as early as possible.

6. With
the aforesaid clarification, the application is disposed off. Rule
is discharged.

(K.M.

Thaker, J.)

rakesh/

   

Top