Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/6139/2010 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6139 of 2010
=========================================================
AMIRMIYA
KODERMIYA SAIEKH & 1 - Applicants
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
YM THAKORE for
Applicants : 1 - 2.
MR RC KODEKAR ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent:
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
Date
: 25/06/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Rule.
Mr. Kodekar, learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of
respondent State. By consent, Rule is fixed forthwith.
The
applicants – accused, who have been arrested in I.CR. No. 150
of 2009 registered with Mansa Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 457, 380, 114, 413 of IPC have moved this
Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for
seeking bail pending trial.
The
accused moved the application being Criminal Misc. Application No.
383 of 2010 before the concerned Sessions Court, which came to be
rejected on 31.5.2010.
This
Court has taken into consideration the documents produced on record
and the reasoning assigned by the Sessions Court while rejecting the
bail application of the applicant. The applicant deserves to be
enlarged on bail for the following reasons:
Shri
Thakore, learned advocate appearing for the applicants submits that
this Court (Coram: A.L. Dave, J.) vide order dated 9.6.2010 in
Criminal Misc. Application No. 5887 of 2010 and this Court (Coram:
H.B.Antali, J.) vide order dated 5494 of 2010 in Criminal Misc.
Application No. 5494 of 2010 has released the accused in similar
case and on the ground of parity the applicants deserve to be
enlarged on bail on appropriate terms and conditions.
Looking
to the averments and nature of evidence and role of the applicants,
they deserve to be enlarged on bail pending trial.
The
applicants have their wherewithal at their ordinary place of
residence and therefore, their presence could be procured by
imposing appropriate conditions during trial.
The
prosecution has not voiced any grievance or expressed any
apprehension that they are likely to flee from justice, if they are
released on bail.
The
prosecution has also not expressed any grievance or apprehension
that they are capable of tempering with evidences or influencing the
witnesses, if they are released on bail.
The
Sessions Court has not appreciated these aspect and therefore, the
said order deserves to be quashed and set aside and accordingly, it
is quashed and set aside.
The aforesaid observations are
made only for the purpose of examining the prayer for bail pending
trial. These observations are prima-facie and shall have no bearing
whatsoever upon the trial and the trial Court shall not be
influenced by it in any way and come to its own conclusion after
analyzing the evidence that may be led during the trial.
Considering the submissions made
on behalf of the parties and having regard to the circumstances and
facts of the case, the application is allowed and the applicant is
ordered to be released on bail in connection I.CR. No. 150 of 2009
registered with Mansa Police Station on his executing a bond of
Rs.5,000=00/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each with one surety of
the like amount to the satisfaction of the lower Court and subject
to the conditions that they shall :
(a) not
take undue advantage of their liberty or misuse their liberty:
(b) not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution:
(c) maintain
law and order;
(d) not
leave the State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the
Sessions Court concerned;
(e) furnish
the address of their residence at the time of execution of the bond
and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this
Court;
(f)
mark their presence before concerned Police Station on every 15th
day of each English Calendar month initially for a period of 6
months between 9.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m.
(g) surrender
their passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week.
If
breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions
Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or to take appropriate
action in the matter.
Bail
before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.
Rule
is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT,
J.)
pallav
Top