Gujarat High Court
Vinod vs State on 5 October, 2011
Author: Z.K.Saiyed
Bench: Z.K.Saiyed
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/13338/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 13338 of 2011
======================================
VINOD
HARIBHAI VANDAR & 1 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
======================================
Appearance
:
MR
HASHIM QURESHI for Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR CM SHAH
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
1,
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 05/10/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. This is an application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicants who came to be arrested in connection with CR No. I-57 of 2011 registered at Veraval Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 125 of the Bombay Police Act.
2. Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the applicants are the innocent persons and they have been wrongly arraigned in the offence. He submitted that the applicants gave feast blow and in the P.M. Note the same is mentioned. He drew the attention to the provisions of Sections 34, 107 and 108 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants have no knowledge nor having any intention to kill the deceased. He also submitted that co-accused have been released by the learned Sessions Court and therefore, considering the parity ground, the applicants may kindly be released on bail by imposing suitable conditions.
3. Learned APP Ms. Shah for the State submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence, in which the applicants are involved, the application of the applicants is required to be rejected. Even from the statement of witness, it appears that the applicants have played active role in the commission of the offence. Therefore, discretion may not be exercised in favour of the applicants.
4. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the role attributed to the applicants as reflected in the FIR, police papers, provisions of Sections of the IPC and quantum of punishment, I am of the view that the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail, as co-accused have been released by the trial Court. This court is not entering into the detail discussion of the evidence at this stage of 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 CR No. I-57 of 2011 registered at Veraval Police Station, on their executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each [Rupees ten thousand only] with one surety 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 15th day of every English Calender month, at 11:00 a.m. till the trial is over;
[f] furnish the present address of his 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 applicant on bail.
9. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted.
(Z.K.SAIYED,J.) ynvyas Top