Gujarat High Court High Court

Zaverbhai vs State on 31 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Zaverbhai vs State on 31 March, 2010
Author: H.B.Antani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/2557/2010	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 2557 of 2010
 

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

 

ZAVERBHAI
@ ZAVERNATH RAJUBHAI VADI - PADHIYAR & 2 - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
YJ PATEL for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 3. 
MR DC SEJPAL, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 31/03/2010 

 

ORAL ORDER

This
is an application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 by the applicants who have been arrested in
connection with CR No. I-11 of 2008 registered with Amroli police
station, Surat District, for the offence punishable under Sections
365, 376, 328, 343, 323, 506[2] and 114 of Indian Penal Code.

Mr.

Y.J. Patel, learned advocate appearing for the applicants submitted
that the applicants are innocent persons and they have not committed
alleged offence as narrated in the FIR. FIR itself is given after
delay of five days and the delay is not explained. It is submitted
that applicant no.3 is not identified in identification parade and
identification parade was not conducted with regard to other
applicants in proper manner. Considering the aforesaid aspect and the
role attributed to the applicants, they deserve to be enlarged on
bail.

Learned
APP Mr. D.C. Sejpal, representing the opponent State while opposing
the application submitted that the applicants are involved in serious
offence punishable under Sections 365, 376, 328, 343, 323, 506[2]
and 114 of IPC. Considering the role attributed to the applicants and
the manner in which they are involved in the commission of offence,
no discretionary relief be granted to the applicants and the
application deserves to be dismissed.

I
have heard the learned advocates of both the sides at length and in
great detail. I have considered the role attributed to the applicants
as reflected in the FIR, police papers, statements of witnesses,
provisions of Sections 365, 376, 328, 343, 323, 506[2] and 114 of
IPC, quantum of punishment as well as gravity of offence. All the
three applicants, as per the FIR at Annexure:A to the application
committed the alleged offence and that fact is also reflected in the
police papers produced by the learned APP. Considering the aforesaid
aspect, I am of the view that since prima facie involvement of the
applicants is made out, no discretionary relief can be granted to the
applicants and the application does not call for any interference by
this Court under Section 439 of the Code.

For
the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the application and the
same is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged.

[H.B.

ANTANI, J.]

pirzada/-

   

Top