Gujarat High Court High Court

Israrahmed vs State on 15 December, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Israrahmed vs State on 15 December, 2010
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/14368/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 14368 of 2010
 

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


 

ISRARAHMED
MOHAMMEDSHARIF CHANDRUNWALA - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=======================================================
Appearance : 
MR
SOEB R BHOHARIA for Applicant(s) : 1,              MR ABDULSAMAD
SHAIKH for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR DIVYESH SEJPAL APP for
Respondent(s) :
1, 
======================================================= 

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 10/12/2010
 

ORAL
ORDER

The
present application has been filed by the applicant-accused under
Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for regular bail, which is a
successive bail after filing of Criminal Misc. Application
No.10617/2010.

The
applicant-accused is charged with having committed offences
under Sections 419, 465, 468 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, for
which, FIR being I-C.R.No.53/2009 has been lodged at Gaikwad Haveli
Police Station, Ahmedabad City.

After
arguing for some time, learned counsel, Mr.Bhoharia for applicant
submitted that in pursuance of the direction given by this Court
while deciding Criminal Misc. Application No.10617/2010, the trial
has commenced but out of 27 witnesses, some have been examined and,
therefore, at-least some direction for expediting the trial may be
given. Learned A.P.P., Mr.Sejpal has stated that the person, who is
present in the Court, is not aware about the exact stage of the trial
but the trial has commenced and, hence, appropriate order may be
passed.

Under
the circumstances, the present application cannot be entertained in
view of the order passed earlier while deciding Criminal Misc.
Application No.10617/2010. However, the Court below is hereby
directed to expedite the trial and compete the same as early as
possible preferably within a period of four months.

It
goes without saying that no adjournment shall be asked for by the
applicant-accused.

With
these observations and directions, the present application stands
disposed of. Rule is discharged.

(RAJESH
H.SHUKLA, J.)

/patil

   

Top