Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/37420/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 374 of 2008
============================================
DEVUBEN
JAYANTIBHAI VAGHELA - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
============================================
Appearance
:
MS JAYSHREE
C BHATT for Applicant(s) : 1,
MR RC KODEKAR
ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for
Respondent(s) : 2,
============================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
Date
: 22/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
Pursuant
to the notice issued by this Court on 29.2.2008, Police Inspector,
SOG Crime Branch, Ahmedabad City has filed the affidavit-in-reply and
in paragraph 4 it is stated as under:
4. I
say and submit that this is an admitted fact in the application
itself that the applicant’s husband and son had been convicted by the
Judicial Court for the life time imprisonment for the offence
punishable under Section 302. The son of the prsent applicant namely
Rajeshbhai @ Lalo Jayantilal Waghela had got parole and he jumped the
parole. The Criminal conspiracy has been hatched in the jail for
killing one Kanaksinh Thakor who is complainant in I.C.R.No.705/2006.
In this complaint, one Deepsinh who is also accused, who is in jail
at present. Rajesh Jayantilal Thakor and Deepsinh Thakor made a
plain to kill the complainant Kanaksinh Thakor. Pursuant to this,
Rajesh had collected the arms illegality but before he did anything,
he had been caught by the police, and hence, complaint is lodged
before the Detection of Crime Branch Police Station, Ahmedabad, being
II C.R. No.3028/2007 sections 25(1)(b), 29 of the Arms Act, under
section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and under section 114 of Indian
Penal Code. Then after, under section 120-B and 118 of Indian Penal
Code had been added by the police investigating agency. Pursuant to
that, report is also made to the concerned Judicial magistrate.
During investigation, total 10 accused persons have been arrested in
this case. As per the statement of the Rakesh Thakor, one arm had
been received by Amar Bhagvatprasad Yadav. Pursuant to that Amar
Bhagavatprasad Yadav had been arrested by the police and statement
has been given by Amarbhai that the said arm had been received from
the Bharat Jayantibhai Thakor who is second son of the present
applicant. This statement has been given by the Amarbhai on
5.2.2008. Then after, police had visited the residence of the present
applicant on 7.2.2008, but the house was locked and nobody was
present. Again on 8.2.2008, police personnel had went to the house
of the present applicant, at that time, the present applicant was
present and hence, police personnel had asked her about her son
Bharat Thakor. But no reply has been given by the present applicant.
Hence, again on 9.2.2008, Police Investigating Agency had went to
the house of the present applicant and recorded the statement of the
present applicant, in which, applicant had stated that she did not
know whereabouts of her son. In this case, charge sheet had also
filed on 19.2.2008.
When
the son of the petitioner has jumped the parole while undergoing
imprisonment for life pursuant to the offences under Section 302 of
I.P.C. and again committed crime while on parole being investigated
by the police and in performance of official duty, the residence of
the petitioner is visited, which cannot be said to be harassment.
No
case is made out. This petition is rejected. Notice is discharged.
[ANANT
S. DAVE, J.]
//smita//
Top