Gujarat High Court High Court

Omprakash vs State on 21 July, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Omprakash vs State on 21 July, 2010
Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/6772/2010	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6772 of 2010
 

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


 

OMPRAKASH
MULTANMAL SANKLECHA & 1 - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
Appearance : 
MR
MEHUL H RATHOD for Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.MR NIRAV K PADHIYAR for
Applicant(s) : 1 2. 
MR HL JANI ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 21/07/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

Rule. Learned APP Mr.
Jani waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent State.

This
application is filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure by the applicant who has been arrested in connection with
C.R. No. I – 639 of 2008 filed before the Salabatpura Police
Station, Surat for the offence punishable under sections 406, 420,
114 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

Mr. Rathod, learned
advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicants are the
innocent persons and a false case is foisted on them. The allegations
levelled against the applicants are general in nature. This is a
clear case of civil nature and the complainant has to file Civil Suit
against the applicants. He submitted that considering the role
attributed to the applicants and reflected in the FIR at Annexure ‘A’
to the application, this is a fit case to enlarge the applicants on
regular bail.

As against the aforesaid,
learned APP Mr. Jani submitted that considering the role played by
the applicant, no discretionary relief can be granted to the
applicant and the application deserves to be dismissed.

Having heard the rival
submissions of learned advocates and having considered the role
attributed to the applicant and reflected in the FIR at Annexure A,
the quantum of punishment, gravity of the offence etc., I am of the
view that the the applicants are required to be enlarged on regular
bail at this stage on stringent conditions, without entering into the
merits of the case and without discussing the evidence in detail.

The parties do not press
for further reasoned order.

In the facts and
circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed and the applicants
are ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection with C.R. No. I –
639 of 2008 registered with Salabatpura Police Station, Surat on
their executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten thousand only] each
with one surety 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]. not leave the
territory limits of Surat City as well as District without prior
permission of the learned Sessions Court.

(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 their residence
without prior permission of this Court;

[g]. maintain law and
order.

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.

Bail bond to be executed
before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.

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.

Rule is made absolute to
the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted.

(Z.K.SAIYED, J.)

ynvyas

   

Top