Gujarat High Court High Court

State vs This on 25 August, 2010

Gujarat High Court
State vs This on 25 August, 2010
Author: Mohit S. D.H.Waghela,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.A/1633/2003	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 1633 of 2003
 

 


 

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

 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

SANOVARKHAN
S/O SHAKURKHAN PATHAN - Opponent(s)
 

==============================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
ARUN D OZA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
None for Opponent(s) :
1, 
==================================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 26/09/2005 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH)

1. This
appeal challenges the order dated 16.10.2003 passed by the learned
Special Judge, POTA, granting bail to one of the accused, namely,
Sanovarkhan, son of Shakurkhan Pathan, in Misc. Criminal Application
No.2636 of 2003, during pendency of the trial.

2. There
was delay in filing the Criminal Appeal. After service of notice of
Rule on the respondent-accused, delay has been condoned. When the
appeal reached admission hearing, we enquired from the learned Public
Prosecutor about the stage of trial and the learned Public Prosecutor
has stated, under instructions of the Investigating Officer, that
the trial has already commenced and some witnesses are already
examined.

3. Apart
from the fact that trial has already commenced, it is brought to our
notice that the accused has not breached any of the conditions
subject to which he was released on bail as far back as on
16.10.2003.

4. In
view of the above, we do not find any justification to go into merits
of the appeal in which the State has raised grounds about
application of Section 49 (7) of the POTA and about sufficiency of
the material on which reliance was placed by the prosecution.

5. The
appeal is accordingly summarily dismissed.

Sd/-

(
M.S.SHAH,J.)

Sd/-

(
D.H.WAGHELA,J.)

(KMG
Thilake)

   

Top