Gujarat High Court High Court

Shaileshkumar vs State on 16 July, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Shaileshkumar vs State on 16 July, 2008
Author: H.B.Antani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/7996/2008	 5/ 5	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 7996 of 2008
 

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


 

SHAILESHKUMAR
JAYANTIBHAI PATEL - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
ASHISH M DAGLI for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MS
MANISHA LAVKUMAR ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 16/07/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Rule.

Learned APP, Ms.Manisha Lavkumar, waives service of rule on behalf of
the respondent-State. In the facts and circumstances of the case,
this application is taken up for hearing today.

2. This
application preferred under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code in
connection with First Information Report bearing No.CR No.I-29 of
2008 registered before the Meghraj Police Station, Sub-district:
Modasa, District: Sabarkantha for the offences punishable under
Sections 392, 186, 201, 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned
advocate submitted that considering the role attributed to the
petitioner since the petitioner was not prima-facie involved in the
commission of offence, it is a fit case to release the applicant on
regular bail. The petitioner would abide by the terms and conditions
imposed by this Court.

3. As
against the aforesaid submissions, the learned APP, Ms.Manisha
Lavkumar, representing the State submitted that considering the
nature of offence and involvement of the applicant in the commission
of offence and the role attributed to the applicant, it is not a case
where the bail is required to be granted and the application deserves
to be rejected.

4. Having
considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the averments made
in the FIR, the petitioner is charged for the offence punishable
under Sections 392, 186, 201 and 114 of the IPC. I have taken into
consideration the role played by the applicant and involvement of the
applicant and the gravity of the offence against the applicant. I
also considered the fact that no antecedent had taken place in the
past. Considering the above, I am
of the view that the the applicant is required to be enlarged on
regular bail at this stage, without discussing the evidence in
detail.

5. The
parties do not press for further reasoned order.

6. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed
and the applicant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection
with C.R. No.I-29/2008 registered at Meghraj Police Station,
Sub-district: Modasa, District: Sabarkantha on executing a bond of
Rs.10,000/- [Rupees ten thousand only] with one 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
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

[c]. surrender
his 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]. mark
his presence at concerned police station on any day of every first
week of English calendar month between 9.00 AM and 2.00 PM. till the
trial is over;

[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 his
residence without prior permission of this Court;

[g]. maintain
law and order.

7. 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.

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

9. 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 applicant on bail.

10. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

11. Direct
Service is permitted.

[H.B.ANTANI,
J.]

ashish//

   

Top