Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/805420/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 8054 of 2008
==================================================
MANSING
@ APPA S/O LALSINH @ SHEVASINH BHATIYA - Applicant
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent
==================================================Appearance
:
MR YJ PATEL for the Applicant.
MR HL JANI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent.
==================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 01/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. RULE.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. H. L. Jani waives service
of rule on behalf of the respondent. At the request of the learned
Counsel appearing for the parties, this application is taken up for
hearing today.
2. This
application is filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure in connection with First Information Report registered as
C.R. No.I 94 of 2007 registered with Muli Police Station, Dist.
Surendranagar for the offence punishable under section 457, 380, 382
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned
Advocate for the petitioner submitted that on perusal of the FIR, the
petitioner has not committed any overt act and therefore, it is a fit
case to release the petitioner on bail. Learned Advocate submitted
that no discovery or recovery was made from the present petitioner.
In view of these facts, learned Advocate submitted that the prayer
for bail be granted.
4. On
the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the
State submitted that considering the role attributed to the
petitioner and the nature of offence in which the petitioner is
involved, the prayer for bail does not call for any interference and
the application is liable to be rejected.
5. Considering
the rival submissions and on perusal of the FIR, the petitioner
cannot be prima facie said to have committed the overt act. No
discovery or recovery was made from the petitioner and recovery was
made from one Mansingh. In view of the above, I am of the view that
the the applicant is required to be enlarged on regular bail at this
stage, without entering into the merits of the case and without
discussing the evidence in detail.
6. The
parties do not press for further reasoned order.
7. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed
and the applicant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection
with C.R. No.I 94 of 2007 registered with Muli Police Station,
Dist. Surendranagar on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees ten
thousand only] with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial court and subject to the conditions that he shall:
[a] not
take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty;
[b] not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
[c] surrender
his 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
his presence at Muli 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 his residence to the I.O. and also to the
Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change his
residence without prior permission of this Court; and,
[g] maintain
law and order.
8. 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.
9. Bail
bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try
the case.
10. 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 applicant on bail.
11. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is
permitted.
[H.
B. ANTANI, J.]
/shamnath
Top