Gujarat High Court High Court

Appearance : vs Mr Hl Jani on 1 September, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Appearance : vs Mr Hl Jani on 1 September, 2008
Author: H.B.Antani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/1091920/2008	 4/ 4	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 10919 of 2008
 

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


 

KIRANSINH
GEMABHAI RATHWA & OTHERS
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
MM TIRMIZI for Applicant. 
MR HL JANI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 01/09/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

RULE. Mr. H.L.

Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of rule on
behalf of the respondent. At the request of the learned counsel
appearing for the parties, this petition is taken up for hearing
today.

This petition is
filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in
connection with First Information Report registered as C.R. No.III
171 of 2008 with Rajgadh Police Station, Dist. Panchmahals for the
offence punishable under sections 66(B), 65(A)(E), 81, 82, 83 and

116.B of the Bombay Prohibition Act.

Learned advocate
representing the petitioners submitted that considering the role
attributed to the petitioners, it is a fit case to enlarge the
petitioners on bail.

On the other
hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State
submitted that there is only one antecedent. However, considering the
role attributed to the petitioners and the manner in which the
offence is committed by the petitioners, no discretionary relief is
required to be given to the petitioners and the petition deserves to
be dismissed.

Heard learned
advocate Mr. Tirmizi for the petitioners and Mr. H.L. Jani, learned
APP at length and in great detail. I have also perused the averments
made in the petition as well as the FIR produced on record of the
petition. The petitioners are booked for the offence punishable under
sections 66(B), 65(A)(E), 81, 82, 83 and 116.B of the Bombay
Prohibition Act. However, considering the role attributed to the
petitioners and the manner in which the offence is alleged to have
been committed by them, I am inclined to exercise my discretion in
favour of the petitioners without entering into the merits of the
case and without discussing the evidence in detail.

The parties do
not press for further reasoned order.

In the facts and
circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed and the
petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection with
C.R. No.III 171 of 2008 with Rajgadh Police Station, Dist.
Panchmahals on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each [Rupees ten
thousand only] with one surety each of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial court and subject to the conditions that
they shall:

[a] not take undue
advantage of their liberty or abuse their liberty;

[b]. not act in a
manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

[c]. surrender
their passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

[d]. not leave the
State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the Sessions court
concerned;

[e]. mark their
presence at Rajgadh police station on any day of every first week of
English calendar month between 9.00 AM and 2.00 PM. till the trial is
over;

[f]. furnish the
present address of their residence to the I.O. and also to the Court
at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change their
residence without prior permission of this Court;

[g]. maintain law
and order.

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 bond to be
executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.

At the trial, the
trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of
preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this
Court while enlarging the petitioners on bail.

Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Direct Service is
permitted.

mathew						[H.B.ANTANI,
J.]
 


 


 


[corrected
as per order passed
 


below
Speaking to the Minutes on
 


05.09.08]
 


 


 


mathew.

    

 
	   
      
      
	    
		      
	   
      
	  	    
		   Top