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


Gujarat High Court
Husanabanu vs State on 3 August, 2010
Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/8253/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 8253 of 2010
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 1306 of 2006
 

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

 

HUSANABANU
SAHIDBHAI KURESHI - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
EJAZ M QURESHI for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR LB DABHI, ADDL.PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
		
	

 

Date
: 03/08/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA)

Rule.

Mr.L.B.Dabhi, learned APP, appears and waives service of notice of
rule on behalf of the respondent – State of Gujarat.

Having
regard to the facts of the case, the application is taken up for
hearing today.

The
applicant – convict prisoner, who, vide judgment and order
dated 29.05.2006 rendered in Sessions Case No.231 of 2005 by the
learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Ahmedabad has
been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302
IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life, has filed this
application, praying to enlarge him on regular bail during the
pendency and final hearing of the above numbered criminal appeal.

Having
heard Mr.Ezaz Qureshi, learned advocate for the applicant and
Mr.L.B.Dabhi, learned APP, for the respondent – State of
Gujarat as well as the impugned judgment and order, so also this
application being third successive bail application and no new
ground is made out, therefore, we are not inclined to enlarge the
applicant on regular bail during the pendency and final hearing of
the criminal appeal.

Seen
in the above context, the instant application lacks merit and
deserves to be rejected.

For
the foregoing reasons, the application fails, and accordingly it is
rejected.

Rule
is discharged.

(A.M.KAPADIA,
J.)

(J.C.UPADHYAYA,
J.)(binoy)

   

Top


Leave a Reply

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

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

107 queries in 0.148 seconds.