Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/1005220/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 10052 of
2008
=========================================
SHAKIL
GULAMHUSEN MAHIDA - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
HRIDAY BUCH for Applicant(s) : 1,
MR HL JANI,
APP for Respondent(s) : 1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 31/07/2008
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE.
Mr HL Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of
Rule on behalf of the State. In the facts and circumstances of the
case and by consent of both the sides, this application is taken up
for hearing today.
2. This
application is preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for regular bail in connection with FIR registered as CR
No. I 260 of 2008 registered with Junagadh City B Division
Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366
and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Mr
Hriday Buch, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was not at all involved in the commission of offences and
he has been wrongly implicated in the offences alleged against him.
Considering the role attributed to the petitioner, it is a fit case
to enlarge him on regular bail.
4. As
against the aforesaid submissions, Mr HL Jani, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor representing the State submitted that considering
the role played by the petitioner and the prima facie, involvement of
the petitioner in the commission of offences, the prayer for bail
does not call for any interference and the petition is liable to be
rejected.
5. Having
considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the averments made
in the petition, the FIR produced at Annexure-A to the petition and
the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Criminal Misc.
Application No.284 of 2008, the petitioner has been booked for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 114 of the IPC. I
have also considered the role which is attributed to the petitioner
and the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of offences.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am
inclined to exercise my discretion in favour of the petitioner.
6. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed
and the petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection
with CR No. I 260 of 2008 registered at Junagadh City B
Division Police Station 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 the 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 petitioner on bail.
10. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct
Service is permitted.
[H.B.
Antani, J.]
mrpandya*
Top