Posted On by &filed under Gujarat High Court, High Court.


Gujarat High Court
Criminal Misc.Application No. … vs Through Jail For Petitioner No on 3 August, 2010
Author: D.K.Trivedi,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.R.Vora,&Nbsp;
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD



     CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No 1703 of 2003


           in


     CRIMINAL APPEALNo 260      of 2003




     For Approval and Signature:



                Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.K.TRIVEDI
                                   and
                Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.R.VORA


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

1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : YES
to see the judgements?

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO
of the judgement?

4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?

5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO
Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals?

————————————————————–
RAMABHAI SABHAIBHAI GOHIL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

————————————————————–
Appearance:

1. Criminal Misc.Application No. 1703 of 2003
MR JM BUDDHBHATTI for Petitioner No. 1
THROUGH JAIL for Petitioner No. 1
Mr.L.R.Poojari, learned APP for Respondent No. 1

————————————————————–

CORAM : MR.JUSTICE D.K.TRIVEDI
and
MR.JUSTICE J.R.VORA

Date of decision: 03/05/2003

ORAL JUDGEMENT
(Per : MR.JUSTICE D.K.TRIVEDI)
Rule. Mr. L.R.Poojari, learned APP waives
service of rule on behalf of respondent. By consent,
rule is fixed forthwith.

As found from the Application forwarded through
jail authority, it is the case of the applicant that he
was convicted by the learned trial Judge for the offence
under Section 302 of the I.P.C. as per judgment and
order of conviction and sentence recorded on 31.12.2002
and he was intending to engage advocate privately,
however, he could not arrange for finance to pay the fees
for advocate due to the financial condition and
accordingly the delay has occurred, for which the
applicant has prayed for condonation of delay of 6 days.
In our view, sufficient cause is shown for delay. Hence
delay is condoned. Rule is made absolute.

(D.K.Trivedi,J)

(J.R.Vora,J)
arg


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

102 queries in 0.151 seconds.