Gujarat High Court High Court

State vs Ramjan on 15 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
State vs Ramjan on 15 March, 2010
Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/10806/2008	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 10806 of 2008
 

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

 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

RAMJAN
ILAHI KAJI & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
RC KODEKAR, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
		
	

 

Date
: 15/03/2010
 

ORAL
ORDER

State
has filed this application for cancellation of regular bail, granted
to the respondents-accused, vide order dated 10th July
2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st
Fast Track Court, Surat, in Criminal Miscellaneous Application
No.801 of 2008.

Against
the present respondents-original accused, criminal complaint was
registered with Salabatpura Police Station bearing I-C.R. No. 356 of
2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 3(A)(B), 12(A),
13(1), 13(2) of the Indian Passport Act, 1967 and under Sections
3(1)(2)(A)(G) and 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

Heard
Mr. R.C. Kodekar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. He has
contended that the learned Judge has not considered the seriousness
of the offence committed by the respondents-accused. He has also
contended that the learned Judge has not considered the fact that
the respondents-accused are citizens of Bangladesh and, therefore,
they are not required to be enlarged on bail. At present the
respondents-accused are not available. Hence, State has filed this
application.

I
have gone through the papers produced before me and also gone
through the order passed by the Trial Court. Today Mr. Kodekar is
unable to convince this Court about the ground on which bail can be
cancelled. It appears from the papers that State has not filed any
application to cancel the bail granted to the respondents-accused
before the trial Court. Mr. Kodekar has contended that he may be
permitted to file cancellation of bail application before the
concerned Court.

In
view of above, in my opinion, the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
1st Fast Track Court, Surat, has not committed any error
while granting bail to the respondents-accused and no interference
is required to be called for by this Court. Hence, this application
is dismissed with a liberty to State to file application for
cancellation of bail granted to the respondents-accused before the
appropriate Court. Rule is discharged.

(Z.

K. Saiyed, J)

Anup

   

Top