Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/13878/2010 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 13878 of 2010
=========================================================
DHARMISHTHABEN
JAYANTIBHAI PATEL - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
BS PATEL for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR DC SEJPAL, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
Date
: 03/12/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. The
present application has been filed by the applicant for grant of
regular bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
which is a successive bail application. The applicant accused had
earlier filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 9566 of 2010.
2. The
applicant accused is charged with having committed offence under
Sections 363, 364, 34, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code for which
FIR being I C.R.No. 287 of 2010 has been registered with Makarpura
Police Station, District: Vadodara.
3. Learned
counsel Mr. B.S.Patel submitted that considering the nature of
offence and the role attributed by the applicant with regard to
destroying the evidence or tampering with the evidence, at the most,
the offence under Section 201 is attracted. He further submitted that
as now the charge sheet has been filed and the applicant is a female
aged about 50 years, she may be released subject to any conditions.
4. Learned
APP Mr. Sejpal resisted the application and submitted that
considering the nature of offence and the manner in which it is
alleged to have been committed, it can even prima facie suggest that
the offence is not for under section 201 only. He, therefore,
submitted that as the deceased minor child was done to death by the
other co-accused (son of the applicant) and thereafter kept for two
days and therefore present application may not be entertained merely
because the charge-sheet is filed.
5. In
view of the rival submissions it is required to be considered whether
the present application can be entertained or not.
5.1. It
is well accepted that this Court is not required to appreciate and
scrutinize the evidence in detail for deciding the bail application.
However, for considering the prima facie case, the relevant aspects
like, nature of offence, manner in which it is alleged to have been
committed, role attributed and weapon used, are required to be
considered. In the facts of the present case, the applicant, prima
facie, cannot be said to have not involved as the evidence prima
facie suggests the involvement of the applicant in the offence and
therefore the submissions made by learned counsel Mr. B.S.Patel
regarding her role cannot be readily accepted. However, considering
the guidelines
with regard to grant of bail as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court
in the judgment reported in AIR
2005 716
in the case of Jayendra
Sarawathi Swamigal V/s. State of Tamil Nadu as
well as (2005)8 SCC 21
in the case of State of U.P
through CBI V/s. Amarmani Tripathi
and also considering the fact that the applicant is a female, only on
that ground, present application deserves to be allowed subject to
the following conditions.
6. Accordingly,
present application stands allowed. The applicant is ordered to be
released on regular bail in connection with F.I.R. being I C.R.No.
287 of 2010 registered with Makarpura Police Station, District:
Vadodara, on her executing a bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five
Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the lower Court and subject to the conditions that
she shall:
(a) not
take undue advantage of her liberty or abuse her liberty.
(b) not
to try to tamper or pressurize the prosecution witnesses or
complainant in any manner.
(c) not
act in any manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution.
(d) maintain
law and order and should cooperate with the investigating officers.
(e) furnish
the address of her residence to the Investigating Officer and also to
the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change
her residence without prior permission of the Court.
(f) surrender
her passport, if any, to the lower Court, within a week.
7. If
breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the concerned
Sessions Judge will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate
action in the matter.
8. Bail
before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It would
be open to the trial Court concerned to give time to furnish the
solvency certificate if prayed for.
9. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(RAJESH
H.SHUKLA, J.)
jani
Top
