Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/8622/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 8622 of 2011
In
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6759 of 2011
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 573 of 2011
=========================================================
PRADHUMANSINH
RANJITSINH JADEJA - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
PREMAL R JOSHI for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR JK SHAH ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT
Date
: 24/06/2011
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)
1. Present
application is filed by the applicant – convict who is on
temporary bail since 14/05/2011 for a period of 45 days on the
occasion of marriage of his niece (brother’s daughter). Learned
Advocate, Mr.Joshi, for the applicant submitted that as there was
marriage, he could not undertake repairing work of the house
immediately, but when the repairing work was undertaken, it was found
to be a major re-construction of his house. In support of the
application, he has annexed as many as 22 photographs showing the
different stages of repairing, initially removing the old plaster and
later on undertaking the new plastering work. Besides, learned
Advocate, Mr.Joshi submitted that this is for the first time when he
is released on temporary bail and though major part of the earlier
bail period is over, no untoward incident is reported and he
requested that taking into consideration the present status of
construction and repairing of house, temporary bail may be extended.
2. Rule.
Mr.Shah, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent State waives service of notice of Rule.
Mr.Shah, made available for perusal the jail remarks.
2.1 At
this juncture, learned Advocate, Mr.Vyas, appearing for the original
complainant expresses apprehension that as the present applicant is
on temporary bail, other two co-accused persons are also out of jail,
one on furlough and another on temporary bail, then it may ignite
some trouble at the village.
2.2 The
apprehension is not found with any substance, in light of the fact
that the convicts are undergoing sentence imposed in Sessions Case
No.54 of 2007, which necessarily means that incident must be more
than four years old and the Court has already imposed
condition of reporting at the nearest Police Station which in
consideration of this Court is sufficient to check of their
behaviour.
3. For
the contents of the application, the application is allowed. The
temporary bail granted by this Court by order dated 12/05/2011 is
extended upto 1st
August, 2011 from the date of expiry of earlier temporary bail period
on the same terms and conditions.
4.1 The
applicant – convict shall surrender to the jail authorities on
1st August, 2011.
5. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(RAVI
R TRIPATHI, J.)
(P
P BHATT, J.)
sompura
Top