Gujarat High Court High Court

Mahesh vs State on 30 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Mahesh vs State on 30 March, 2010
Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Bankim.N.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/3076/2010	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 3076 of 2010
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 150 of 2007
 

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

 

MAHESH
JASHUBHAI RANGI, THRO' JASHUBHAI DEVABHAI RANGI - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
TEJAS P SATTA for
Applicant(s) : 1,PARTY-IN-PERSON for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR MR
MENGDEY APP for Respondent(s) : 1
-2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 30/03/2010  
ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)

Heard
party-in-person and learned APP Mr Mengdey.

2. The
applicant seeks release of his son, prisoner Mahesh Jashubhai Rangi
on the ground of psychiatric impairment and necessary treatment of
the prisoner’s daughter Vaishali. The applicant, party-in-person,
states that he is suffering from several disorders and physically not
fit to take care of his grand-daughter. He, however, admits that he
has a younger son, who is aged about 20 years.

3. Incidentally,
the convict is convicted for murder of his own son i.e. younger
brother of Vaishali as he suspected fidelity of his wife. The second
factor that deters us from considering this application as genuine is
that only a few days back, an application was moved by the convict’s
wife for temporary bail of the convict on the ground of Vaishali’s
SSC Board examination and at that time, there was no reference to
any psychiatric problem. Yet another application was preferred for
temporary bail on the ground of examination of the applicant’s
daughter bearing No.1972 of 2010, which came to be rejected by this
Court.

4. Keeping
these factors in mind, the application does not seem us to be
genuine. Hence, rejected.

(A.L.

DAVE, J.)

(BANKIM
N. MEHTA, J.)

zgs/-

   

Top