Gujarat High Court High Court

Kanubhai vs State on 29 October, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Kanubhai vs State on 29 October, 2010
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/12088/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 12088 of 2010
 

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


 

KANUBHAI
NARANDAS PATEL - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=======================================================
Appearance : 
MR
YV BRAHMBHATT for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR JM PANCHAL SPECIAL PP for
Respondent(s) :
1, 
======================================================= 

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 29/10/2010
 

ORAL
ORDER

The
present application has been filed by the applicant-accused under
Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for regular bail after filing
of the chargesheet.

The
applicant-accused is charged with having committed offences
under Sections 147, 148, 149, 435, 436, 452, 295 and 153(A) of the
Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act,
for which, FIR being I-C.R.No.59/2002 has been lodged at Kalol
Taluka Police Station, District : Gandhinagar.

Learned
counsel, Mr.Brambhatt for the applicant submitted that initially the
applicant was not arraigned as accused, however, further
investigation was ordered under Section 173(8) of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 and on that basis, the statements were
recorded. Learned counsel, Mr.Brahmbhatt referred to the statements
of the witnesses and submitted that the applicant was not present at
the time of incident and he has not played any role and, hence, he
is not involved in the commission of alleged offence. He, therefore,
submitted that the present application may be allowed.

Learned
Special P.P., Mr.J.M. Panchal appearing for the State referred to
the observations in the impugned order of the Sessions Court
rejecting the bail application of the applicant-accused and
submitted that the complainant has made an application with regard
to threats given by the accused before the authority. He, therefore,
submitted that the present application may not be entertained.

Having
heard learned counsel, Mr.Brahmbhatt for the applicant and learned
Special P.P., Mr.Panchal for the State and having considered the
nature/gravity of the offence, role attributed and also considering
the other circumstances including the guidelines with regard to
grant of bail, where the aspect of reasonable apprehension is
required to be considered, the present application cannot be
entertained.

Accordingly,
the present application stands rejected. Rule is discharged.

(RAJESH
H.SHUKLA, J.)

/patil

   

Top