Gujarat High Court
Pathan Irfan @ Mausin Yasinkhan ... vs State Of Gujarat on 13 February, 2020
Author: Vipul M. Pancholi
Bench: Vipul M. Pancholi
R/CR.MA/21530/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 21530 of 2019
=============================================
PATHAN IRFAN @ MAUSIN YASINKHAN HAMIDKHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=============================================
Appearance:
MR MM TIRMIZI(1117) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR H K PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Date : 13/02/2020
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. I - 27 of 2019 registered with Sami Police Station, Patan for offence under Sections 376(2)(e)(n), 376(c)(d), 376(D), 120(B), 201 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66(E) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act as well as Sections 30 and 35 of the Medical Practitioners' Act.
2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
3. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 14 03:21:59 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/21530/2019 ORDER gravity of the offence.
4. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.
5. Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
6. This Court has considered following aspects,
(a) Applicant is in jail since 04.07.2019.
(b) Investigation is over. Chargesheet is filed.
(c) It is submitted by learned advocate for the applicant that allegation of rape is not levelled against the applicant in the papers of chargesheet.
(d) It is further submitted that for the allegations levelled against the applicant, maximum punishment prescribed under Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act is five years.
(di) I have considered role attributed to the applicant and punishment prescribed for the alleged offence. Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, I am inclined to consider the case of the applicant.
Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 14 03:21:59 IST 2020
R/CR.MA/21530/2019 ORDER
7. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40.
8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. I - 27 of 2019 registered with Sami Police Station, Patan on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;
[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
[c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;
[d] not leave the India without prior permission of the concerned trial court;
[e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station between 1st to 10th day of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;
[f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the concerned trial court;
Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 14 03:21:59 IST 2020
R/CR.MA/21530/2019 ORDER
[h] not enter into Sami Town for a period of six
months; except for marking of presence and attending Court proceedings.
9. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.
10. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
11. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J) NEHA Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 14 03:21:59 IST 2020