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


Gujarat High Court
Kalaji vs State on 4 August, 2010
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/7830/2010	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 7830 of 2010
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 218 of 2010
 

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

KALAJI
SHAKRAJI THAKOR - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

========================================= 
Appearance
: 
MR NITIN M
AMIN for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR LR POOJARI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
=========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 04/08/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

The
present application has been filed by the applicant original accused
for suspension of the sentence under sec. 389 of Cr.P.C. and for
grant of bail.

2. The
applicant accused has been convicted in Sessions Case No. 59/2008 by
the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad Rural, vide judgment and
order dated 7.12.2009 recording conviction of the accused for the
offence under sec. 498A r/w sec. 114 and for offence under sec. 306
r/w sec. 114 of IPC imposing sentence of R.I. for 3 years and fine
of Rs. 3,000/-, i/d R.I for 6 months for the offence u/s 498A, and
R.I for 7 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, i/d R.I. for 1 year for the
offence u/s 306 of IPC.

3. Learned
advocate Mr. Amin referred to the material and evidence including the
DD and the observations made in the judgment and submitted that sec.
306 would not be attracted as there cannot be said to be any
instigation. He pointedly referred to the DD for that purpose and
submitted that it could not be stated as harassment and submitted
that hearing of the appeal may take some time and pending the trial
he was on bail and therefore this application may be allowed.

4. Learned
APP Mr. Poojari resisted the application.

5. Having
heard learned advocate Mr. Amin and learned APP Mr. Poojari and
having perused the papers including the DD and having regard to the
provisions of sec. 306 of IPC and sec. 389 of Cr.P.C. and considering
the nature of offence, the court is of the opinion that the present
application deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands allowed.
The order of sentence shall remain suspended till the final hearing
of the present appeal.

The
applicant is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing a bond
of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) with one surety of the
like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court and subject to the
conditions that the applicant shall:

(a) not
take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty.

(b) not
to try to tamper with the evidence or pressurize the prosecution
witnesses or complainant in any manner.

(c) maintain
law and order.

(d) surrender
his passport, if any, to the lower court, within a week.

Rule
is made absolute. D.S. permitted.

a

(Rajesh
H. Shukla, J.)

(hn)

   

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 0.234 seconds.