Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/7996/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 7996 of 2010
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 797 of 2006
=========================================================
ROHAN
RAJARAM MADRASI - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
THROUGH
JAIL for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MS MINI NAIR, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
Date
: 09/08/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA)
Rule.
Ms.Mini Nair, learned APP, appears and waives service of notice of
Rule on behalf of the respondent – State of Gujarat.
Having
regard to the facts of the case, the application is taken up for
hearing today.
The
applicant – convict prisoner, who, vide judgment and order
dated 14.10.2005 rendered in Sessions Case No.10 of 2003 by the
Additional City Sessions Court No.13, Ahmedabad has been convicted
for the offences punishable under Sections 302 etc. IPC and
sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life, has filed this
application through the jail authority, praying to enlarge him on
regular bail during the pendency and final hearing of the above
numbered criminal appeal, alternatively, hearing of appeal may be
expedited.
We
have considered the submissions advanced by Ms.Mini Nair, learned
APP, for the respondent – State of Gujarat. We have also
perused the application and the supporting documents that form part
of the application. We have also gone through the jail remarks sheet
forwarded by the jail authority along with the application.
Upon
perusal of the averments made in the application as well as the
previous order passed by this Court in Criminal Misc.Application
No.4414 of 2006 passed in this criminal appeal, it is seen that no
case was made out for grant of bail, and in this application no new
ground is made out by the applicant to review the earlier order
passed by this Court. Besides this, while releasing the applicant on
furlough leave, he has jumped the leave and absconded for a total
period of 1174 days, and thereafter, he was arrested by the police
and sent to jail. Besides this, upon perusal of the jail remarks
sheet, he has undergone more than 5 years imprisonment as against
sentence of imprisonment for life. So also those
convicts, who have filed their appeals earlier in point of time than
the applicant and are languishing in Jail, are eagerly awaiting
hearing of their appeals. No good ground is made out by the
applicant as to why priority should be accorded to him in the matter
of hearing of his appeal more particularly when those convicts who
have filed their appeals earlier in point of time than the applicant
and are languishing in jail, are eagerly awaiting hearing of their
appeals. Seen in the above context, we are not inclined to
grant either of the reilef i.e. releasing him on regular bail during
the pendency and final hearing of the above numbered criminal appeal
or expeditious hearing of the criminal appeal.
For
the foregoing reasons, the application fails and accordingly it is
rejected.
Rule
is discharged.
(A.M.KAPADIA,
J.)
(J.C.UPADHYAYA,
J.)
(binoy)
Top