Gujarat High Court High Court

Mohammad vs State on 25 October, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Mohammad vs State on 25 October, 2010
Author: Akil Kureshi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCR.A/2120/2010	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 2120 of 2010
 

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

 

MOHAMMAD
HANIF AHMED PATEL - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
HL
PATEL ADVOCATES for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR MANGESH MENGADE ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 25/10/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

Petitioner
is aggrieved by an order dated 11.10.2010 passed by the Joint
Sessions Judge, Panchmahals, Godhra below application No.123 filed by
the present petitioner in Sessions Case No.65 of 2005.

Petitioner
had succeeded in convincing this Court to direct further
investigation which was recorded in the order dated 22.09.2010 passed
in Criminal Misc. Application No.1804 2010 and connected matters.
Such investigation was to be completed within three months from the
date of the order. In the mean time, Sessions Court has started
trial. At which stage, the petitioner moved an application Exh.123
till such investigation is completed, trial may be stayed. This
application came to be turned down by the impugned order dated
11.10.2010.

Having
heard learned advocates for the parties and having perused the
documents, I am of the opinion that it is unlikely that trial will be
concluded before the period granted for further investigation is
over. Learned Sessions Judge has recorded that since 2005 the case
has not commenced. Under the circumstances, I see no reason to
interfere. It is, however, provided that in the unlikely event of
concluding the trial before the further investigation is over, final
judgment shall not be passed without an order from the High Court.

With
the above observations and direction, the petition is disposed of.

(
AKIL KURESHI, J. )

kailash

   

Top