Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/10670/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 10670 of 2010
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 1565 of 2010
=========================================
HARIBHAI
NAVGHANBHAI DODIA & 1 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
AD SHAH for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR HH PARIKH, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
for Respondent(s) : 1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 13/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Rule.
Mr.H.H. Parikh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, waives
service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.
This
application is filed by the applicants under Section 389 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for releasing them on bail, pending
the appeal, in connection with the order dated 04th
September 2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and
Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.2, Ahmedabad (Rural),
Mirzapur, in Sessions Case No.20 of 2005.
Heard
Mr.A.D. Shah, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr.H.H. Parikh,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State.
Present
applicants-convict were convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code and is ordered to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of
Rs.5,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment of two
months. The applicants were also ordered to undergo sentence of five
years with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to suffer simple
imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section
326 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants were also ordered to
undergo imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and
in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days for the offence
punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. However, it
was clarified that both the sentences shall run concurrently.
Mr.Shah,
learned counsel for the applicants, has contended that amount of
fine is already deposited with the trial Court.
Mr.Parikh,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has contended that the order
passed by the trial Court is absolutely just and proper and hence,
the present application is not required to be allowed.
I
have perused the papers as well as oral and documentary evidence
produced before me. I have also gone through the order passed by the
learned trial Court. It appears from the papers that this is a fit
case to release the applicants on bail and hence, present
application is allowed and the applicants are ordered to be released
on bail, pending the appeal, on their furnishing bail bond in the
sum of Rs.10,000/- each along with one surety of the like amount and
on usual terms and conditions. Rule is made absolute to the
aforesaid extent.
Direct
Service is permitted.
(Z.
K. Saiyed, J)
Anup
Top