Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/12497/2009 3/ 5 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 12497 of 2009
=========================================================
ARVIND
RAMCHANDRA PRASAD VERMA - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SV RAJU FOR MR AB GATESHANIYA
for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MS ML SHAH APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 19/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
application is preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 seeking regular bail by the applicant, who has been
arrested in connection with the F.I.R. registered as C.R.No.I-0320 of
2000 with Jetpur police station, Rajkot for the offence punishable
under Sections 302, 452, 34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 25(1)A of the Arms Act.
2. Learned
Senior Advocate Mr.S.V. Raju for Mr.A.B.
Gateshaniya for the applicant submitted that the alleged
offence was committed on 13.12.2000 at about 23:00 hrs. at
night. Initially, the investigation in the said offence was carried
out by the local police officer of Jetpur police station and
thereafter by C.I.D. (Crime Branch Rural). The chargesheet was
initially filed against the other accused. The applicant was arrested
on 27.07.2004 and sent to the judicial custody. A separate
chargesheet was filed qua the applicant and the case was registered
as Sessions Case No.78 of 2004 in the trial court. The applicant
preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.5928 of 2006 which was
dismissed by order dated 19.07.2006. The applicant filed another
application being Criminal Misc. Application No.360 of 2007 and the
learned trial court vide order 24.07.2007 dismissed the said
application. It is submitted that the trial in the aforesaid case has
not commenced and the applicant, without his fault, is imprisoned
and, therefore, he preferred bail application before the trial court
being Criminal Misc. Application No.93 of 2009 which was rejected on
11.06.2009. The learned advocate submitted that since more than five
years, the trial in the above Sessions Case No.78 of 2004 has not
commenced and, therefore, prayer, as set out in the
application, be granted. The learned advocate submitted that because
of pendency of a quashing petition, stay has been granted by the High
Court and, therefore, the sessions case has not proceeded. Even on
merits, nothing is recovered from the applicant and he has been
falsely implicated in the commission of offence punishable under
Sections 302, 452, 34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section
25(1)A of the Arms Act. The learned advocate submitted that if bail
is not granted to the applicant then he would languish in jail till
quashing petition is decided by this Court. Thus, the learned
advocate submitted that in view of the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case and even though it is a successive bail
application, prayer for bail, as set out in the application, be
granted and the applicant be enlarged on bail. The learned advocate
placed reliance on the following judgments in support of the
submission that if the trial could not be proceeded for one reason or
the other, then the applicant is required to be enlarged on bail.
(i)
State, CBI/SPE, New Delhi V/s. Pal Singh and another reported in
(2001)1 SCC 247;
(ii)
Mehmood Mohammed Sayeed V/s. State of Maharashtra reported in
(2002)10 SCC 677;
(iii)
Mohd. Chand Mulani V/s. Union of India and Another reported in
(2006)13 SCC 143;
(iv)
Nanjappa V/s. Union of India reported in (2007)4 SCC 350;
(v)
Bal Krishna Pandey alias Vidur V/s. State of U.P. reported in
(2003)12 SCC 186;
(vi)Satya
Brat Gain V/s. State of Bihar reported in (2000)9 SCC 398 and;
(vii)
Akhtari BI (Smt.) V/s. State of M.P. reported in (2001)4 SCC 355.
3. Learned
A.P.P. Ms.M.L. Shah, representing the respondent-State, while
opposing the bail application, submitted that this is a successive
bail application and considering the role attributed to the applicant
and the manner in which the offence is committed by him under Section
302 of the Indian Penal Code, no discretionary relief be granted to
the applicant. The learned A.P.P. submitted that because of the stay
granted by the High Court in a quashing petition, the trial could not
be proceeded and that cannot be the ground to prefer the successive
bail application, seeking enlargement of the applicant on regular
bail. The judgments cited by the learned Senior Advocate for the
applicant are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the
present case and, therefore, the learned A.P.P. submitted that
considering the role attributed to the applicant, manner in which the
offence is committed by him and since the present application is a
successive bail application, no interference is called for in the
application and the same be dismissed.
4. I
have heard learned Senior Advocate Mr.S.V. Raju for Mr.A.B.
Gateshaniya for the applicant and learned A.P.P. Ms.M.L. Shah
for the respondent State at length and in great detail. I have
considered the role attributed to the applicant and the manner in
which the alleged offence of murder is committed by him along with
the other accused. This application is a successive bail application
and, therefore, this Court would have very limited powers and scope
to interfere. It can be interfered with only if there is substantial
change in the circumstances. Considering the role attributed to the
applicant and the manner in which the alleged offence is committed by
him, I am of the view that no interference is called for in the
application.
5. I
have also considered the judgments cited by learned Senior Advocate
Mr.S.V. Raju for the applicant and there is no dispute about the
ratio or proposition laid down in the said judgments. However,
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the judgments
are not applicable to the present case.
6. For
the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the application and the
same is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged.
(H.B.ANTANI,
J.)
Hitesh
Top