Gujarat High Court High Court

Ramanlal vs State on 16 November, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Ramanlal vs State on 16 November, 2011
Author: Z.K.Saiyed,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/14889/2011	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 14889 of 2011
 

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


 

RAMANLAL
CHHAGANLAL PANDYA - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
VAIBHAV N SHETH for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
MS CM SHAH, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
=========================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
		
	

 

Date
: 16/11/2011
 

ORAL
ORDER

By
way of present application, filed under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed to release him on
regular bail in connection with CR No.I-61 of 2009 registered with
Bayad Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 465,
468, 471 , 219, 166, 167 read with Section 120(B) of the Indian
Penal Code.

Heard
Mr.Vaibhav Sheth, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms.C.M.
Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.

Mr.Sheth,
learned counsel for the applicant, has contended that the applicant
is innocent and has not committed any offence. He has also contended
that if the allegations made in the FIR be taken as it is, then also
it does not disclose any prima-facie case against the present
applicant. He has further contended that 10 different FIRs are
lodged against the applicant, out of which in six FIRs the present
applicant is already released on bail by this Court. Facts of those
case are similar to the facts of the present case. He has further
contended that the investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;
all the offences are magistrate triable offences and prima-facie the
allegations levelled against the applicant is that he was not duly
authorised to put the properties in auction. He has further
contended that all the cases against the applicant is transferred
before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Himmatnagar. He, therefore, contended that looking to the facts of
the case and overall circumstances, applicant may kindly be released
on bail.

Ms.C.M.

Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, read the police papers
and order of the learned trial Court and vehemently opposed the
present application.

Having
regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of
offence, the role attributed to the accused-applicant and the fact
that the investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed, I am
inclined to exercise my discretion in favour of the
accused-applicant.

Hence,
the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with
CR No.I-61 of 2009 registered with Bayad Police Station, for the
offence alleged against him in this application on his executing a
bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with one solvent
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
to try to tamper or pressurise the prosecution witnesses or
complainant in any manner;

c) maintain
law and order and should cooperate the Investigating Officer;

d) not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

e) not
leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions
Judge concerned;

f) mark
his presence twice at Modasa Rural Police Station on every 15th
and 30th day of each English calendar month between 09.00
hours and 14.00 hours;

g) furnish
the address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to
the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change
the residence without prior permission of this Court;

h) surrender
his passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week.

If
the breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the
concerned Court will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate
action in the matter.

Bail
before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It would
be open to the trial Court concerned to give time to furnish the
solvency certificate if prayed for. Rule is made absolute.

Direct
service is permitted.

(Z.

K. Saiyed, J)

Anup

   

Top