Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/2743/2011 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 2743 of 2011
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 1468 of 2007
=================================================
SHANAJI
LALAJI - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance
:
THROUGH
JAIL for Applicant(s) : 1,
Mr.J.K. SHAH, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
for Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
2,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT
Date
: 16/03/2011
ORAL
ORDER
(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)
RULE.
Mr.J.K. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of
rule on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. On
8th March 2011,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor was granted time to see that
District
Superintendent of Police, Sabarkantha files report after inquiring
personally or through a responsible officer on the point wither the
applicant can be released on his personal bond. The District
Superintendent of Police, Sabarkantha was also expected to make
inquiry at two villages, namely, (i) village Narsoli, Taluka
Bhiloda, District Sabarkantha, and (ii) village Kundal, Taluka
Modasa, District Sabarkantha.
3. The
learned Additional Public Prosecutor placed on record communication
dated 13.03.2011 addressed by the District Superintendent of Police,
Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar to the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor. The report is prepared on the basis of the statements
recorded of various persons like brothers of the accused, namely,
Galbaji Lalaji and Joitabhai Lalaji and also one Nanjibhai Pujabhai
of Kundal, Tal.Modasa, Dist.Sabarkantha.
From
the statement of Joitabhai Lalaji, brother of the convict it is borne
out that the present convict and Savitaben were residing as husband
and wife, but as the convict did not have any relation whatsoever
with his brothers and sisters, nobody knew whether he had in fact
married Savitaben. Not only that they did not know the whereabouts
of other relatives of Savitaben. It is also stated by this Joitabhai
Lalaji that, much prior to the incident of murder for which the
present convict is undergoing sentence said Savitaben leaving behind
a son, then aged 1 year had left the present convict; that son was
kept by Joitabhai Lalaji with him and for the last about 5 years
Joitabhai Lalaji has shifted to Village Hindupur and kept son-Sunil
with him. It is stated that today the age of that son-Sunil is about
10 years.
4. The
picture which emerges from the totality of the circumstances is that
there in nobody to house the convict on his release from Jail. That
is the reason why, when he was granted furlough nobody turned up to
be his surety and therefore, he could not enjoy that furlough.
5. Taking
this case to be a case of peculiar nature, this Court is of the
opinion that the present convict be released on temporary bail for
two days with Police escort at the cost of the State so as to enable
the convict to revive/ have some contact and to get somebody prepared
to be his surety so that he can enjoy furlough. At present, it
appears that the convict is totally cut of from the society as
neither his brothers nor his sisters are keeping relations with him.
His wife has already deserted him about 10 years before. It is good
that Joitabhai Lalaji has maintained his son, Sunil for all these
years. Only with a view to see that this person is able to find some
place in the society, it is deemed fit that he be granted temporary
bail.
By
now he has already undergone 4 years, 1 month and 22 days of
imprisonment since the date of his arrest, viz. 03.01.2007 and he has
not enjoyed any furlough, parole or temporary bail, though a furlough
was granted. Therefore, in the facts of this case this order is
passed.
6. The
applicant- appellant- original accused has been convicted for the
offences punishable under section 302 of the IPC and section 135 of
the Bombay Police Act to suffer imprisonment for life with fine of
Rs.1500/-, in default, to undergo a further sentence of 9 months in
Sessions Case No.72 of 2007 rendered by the learned Judge, Fast Track
Court No.6, Modasa.
7. The applicant- appellant-
convict is ordered to be released on temporary bail for 2 (two)
days with Police escort at the cost of the State from the
date of his release on his executing a personal bond of Rs.5000/-
(Rupees five thousand only) to the satisfaction of the Jail
authorities.
8. The applicant shall
surrender himself to the Jail authorities on expiry of the above
temporary bail period.
9. The application is
allowed. Rule is made absolute.
(RAVI
R. TRIPATHI, J.)
(P.P.
BHATT, J.)
karim
Top