Gujarat High Court
Tinabhai vs State on 2 June, 2011
Author: B.M.Trivedi
Bench: B.M.Trivedi
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
R/SCR.A/1313/2011
ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 1313 of 2011
================================================================
TINABHAI
@ DINESHBHAI RANCHHODBHAI....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
THROUGH
JAIL for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR
JK SHAH APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:
HONOURABLE
MS.JUSTICE B.M.TRIVEDI
Date
: 02/06/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. Rule.
Learned A.P.P. Mr.J.K. Shah waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent-State.
2. The present application has been moved by the petitioner through jail seeking his release on parole for a period of 45 days on the ground that he wanted to make necessary arrangement for the payment of fine of Rs.6,000/- imposed by the trial court while convicting him.
3. The jail authority, Vodadara has submitted the report from which, it transpires that the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch as per the judgment and order dated 25.05.2007 and thereafter, the petitioner was released on furlough twice. Thereafter, the petitioner had recently made an application to the learned District Magistrate, Vadodara for releasing him on parole for making necessary arrangement to pay the amount of fine of Rs.6,000/- which was rejected by the learned Extra Additional Magistrate, Vadodara as per the order dated 27.04.2011, considering the adverse police report of S.P., Bharuch.
4. Considering the said order and considering the fact that the order of conviction and fine was passed by the Sessions Court as back as in May, 2007, there is no reason to release the petitioner on furlough on such a flimsy ground of making arrangement for the payment of fine.
5. There being no substance in the present application, the same deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged.
(BELA TRIVEDI, J.) Hitesh Page 2 of 2 Top