Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/10321/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 10321 of 2010
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 1503 of 2010
=========================================
YOGESHKUMAR
GIRJASHANKAR SHARMA & 1 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance
:
MS
KUSUM PATEL FOR MR AM PAREKH for Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR HH
PARIKH ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 23/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. Rule.
Mr. H.H. Parikh, learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the
State. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this
application is taken up for hearing today.
2. This
is an application preferred by the applicant under Section 389 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure seeking bail against the judgment and
order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gandhiangar in Sessions Case No.75
of 2008 dated 22.3.2010 by which the learned Judge has convicted the
applicant No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the
Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years and to
pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, further R.I. for a period of 1
month. The appellant No.1 was further ordered to undergo R.I. for a
period one year and imposed fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, further
R.I. of one month, for the offe4nce punishable under Section 506(2)
of the Indian Penal Code and he was ordered to undergo R.I. for one
year and fine of Rs.250/-, in default, further R.I. of one month, for
the offence punishable under Section 342 read with 114 of the Indian
Penal Code. So far as the appellant No.2 is concerned, he was also
ordered to undergo R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-,
in default, further R.I. of three months for the offence punishable
under Sections 342 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
3.
I have perused the papers and submissions made by the parties. It
appears from the papers that so far the present applicant No.1 is
concerned, I have not found any substance to grant bail application
to him. So far the applicant No.2 is concerned, looking to the
punishment imposed under Section 342 read with 114 of the Indian
Penal Code, he has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge and
ordered to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and fine of
Rs.1000/-, in default, further R.I. of three months. It appears from
endorsement made on the judgment of the trial Court that the
applicant No.2 accused No.2 has paid fine.
3. Considering
the fact that the appeal is arising from the short sentence imposed
by the learned Judge and considering the pendency of large number of
matters, I am of the view that the applicant No.2 Sharma Ramanand
Ashrama deserves to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a bond of
Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with one surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court and subject to the
conditions that :-
(i) The
applicant No.2 shall not leave the territorial limits of the State of
Gujarat without prior permission of this Court.
(ii) The
applicant No.2 shall not involve himself in such or similar offence
hereafter.
(iii) The
applicant No.2 shall surrender his passport, if any, before the Trial
Court concerned.
4. In
the meanwhile, the the substantive sentence
imposed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gandhiangar in Sessions
Case No.75 of 2008 dated 22.3.201 shall remain suspended during
pendency and final disposal of the appeal so far it relates to
applicant No.2 only.
5. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent qua the applicant No.2. Rule
is discharged qua the applicant No.1. Direct service is permitted.
(Z.K.
SAIYED, J.)
ynvyas
Top