Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/112/2010 1/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 112 of
2010
=========================================================
MAKWANA
DINESHBHAI REVABHAI & 4 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR.D
K.PUJ for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 5.
MS. MANISHA L. SHAH, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
MR YM THAKORE for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 27/01/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
is an application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 by the applicants for regular bail, who came to be
arrested, in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No. I-289 of
2009 with Visnagar Police Station for the offence punishable under
Sections 376 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned
advocate for the applicants submitted that the applicants are not the
main culprit who were involved in the alleged commission of offence
punishable under Sections 376 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
Considering the role attributed to the applicants which can be seen
from the F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the application and at the most they
can be said to be abettor in the alleged commission of offence. In
view of the aforesaid aspects, learned advocate submitted that all
the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned
counsel for the complainant has submitted that the applicants have
committed a serious offence punishable under Sections 376 and 114 of
the Indian Penal Code and the manner in which the offence is
committed by the applicants along with the main culprit, no
discretionary relief be granted and the application deserves to be
dismissed.
4. Learned
A.P.P. Ms. Manisha L. Shah, representing the State, while opposing
the bail application, submitted that considering the role played by
the applicants which is reflected in F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the
application and the manner in which the offence is committed by the
applicants along with the main culprit, no lenient view be taken in
the matter and the application does not call for any interference by
this Court and the same is deserves to be dismissed.
5. I
have heard learned advocate Mr. D.K. Puj appearing for the
applicants, learned advocate Mr. Y.M. Thakore for the complainant and
learned A.P.P. Ms. Manisha L. Shah appearing for the State at length
and in great detail. I have considered the averments made in the
application, role attributed to the applicants which is reflected in
F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the application, provisions of Sections 376
and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, police papers, quantum of
punishment etc. Considering the same, I am of the view that the
applicants are at the most can be said to have been abettor in the
commission of offence punishable under Section 376 and 114 of the
Indian Penal Code. In view of the above, I am of the view that the
applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail.
6. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed
and the applicants are ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection
with C.R. No. I-289 of 2009 registered at Visnagar Police Station on
executing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with
one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court and subject to the conditions that they shall:
(a) not
take undue advantage of their liberty or abuse their liberty;
(b) not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
(c) surrender
their passport, if any, to the lower court within a week.
(d) not
leave the State of Gujarat without the prior permission of the
Sessions Court concerned;
(e) mark
their presence at the concerned Police Station on any day of every
first week of English calendar month between 9.00 AM and 2.00 PM.
till the trial is over;
(f) furnish
the present address of their residence to the I.O. and also to the
Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change
their residence without prior permission of this Court;
(g) maintain
law and order.
7. If
breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions
Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or to take appropriate
action in the matter.
8. Bail
bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try
the case.
9. At
the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the
observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage,
made by this Court while enlarging the applicants on bail.
10. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct
Service is permitted.
(H.B.ANTANI,J.)
Shekhar
Top