Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/491/2010 1/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 491 of 2010
=========================================
VINU
@ VINOD MANSUKHBHAI RAVAL & 2 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR PM DAVE
for Applicant(s) : 1 -
3.
MS. MANISHA L. SHAH, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 05/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
is an application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 by the applicants for regular bail, who were
arrested, in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No. I-36 of
2009 with Ditwas Police Station for the offence punishable under
Sections 307, 504, 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of
the Bombay Police Act.
2. Learned
advocate for the applicants submitted that the applicants are
innocent persons and they have not committed any crime as alleged in
the F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the application. From the bare perusal of
the F.I.R. it becomes clear that F.I.R. was lodged after a
considerable delay of two days. He further submitted that
considering the role attributed to the applicants which can be seen
from the F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the application and since the
person, who sustained the injuries, has now recovered and discharged
from the hospital, therefore, the applicants deserve to be enlarged
on bail.
3. Learned
A.P.P. Ms. Manisha L. Shah, representing the State, while opposing
the bail application, submitted that the applicants are involved in a
serious offence punishable under Sections 307, 504, 114 of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. Considering the
role attributed to the applicants and the nature of the offence in
which the applicants are involved, no lenient view be taken in the
matter and the application does not call for any interference by this
Court and the same is deserved to be dismissed.
4. I
have heard learned advocate Mr. Paresh M. Dave appearing for the
applicants and learned A.P.P. Ms. Manisha L. Shah appearing for the
State at length and in great detail. I have considered the rival
submissions, averments made in the application, role attributed to
the applicants which is reflected in F.I.R. at Annexure-A to the
application and the manner in which the alleged offence is committed
by them, provisions of Sections 307, 504, 114 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and the fact that the
applicants gave stick blow to the injured and threw him in the well.
However, after taking treatment as injured has recovered and
discharged from the hospital, I am of the view that the applicants
deserve to be enlarged on bail.
5. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed
and the applicants are ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection
with C.R. No. I-36 of 2009 registered at Ditwas Police Station, on
executing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with
one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court and subject to the conditions that they shall:
(a) not
take undue advantage of their liberty or abuse their liberty;
(b) not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
(c) surrender
their 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
their presence at the concerned Police Station on 1st
and 15th of every English calendar month between 9.00
AM and 02.00 PM. till the trial is over;
(f) furnish
the present address of their residence to the I.O. and also to the
Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change
their residence without prior permission of this Court;
(g) maintain
law and order.
6. 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.
7. Bail
bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try
the case.
8. 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 applicants on bail.
9. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service today is
permitted.
(H.B.ANTANI,J.)
Shekhar
Top