Gujarat High Court
Somabhai vs State on 15 June, 2010
Author: H.B.Antani
Bench: H.B.Antani
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/5460/2010 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 5460 of 2010
=========================================================
SOMABHAI
ALIAS SOMLABHAI BAVABHAI HALPATI & 5 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
SUNIL C PATEL for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 6.
MR DC SEJPAL, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 15/06/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. Rule. Mr DC Sejpal, learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the State. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and by consent of both the sides, this application is taken up for hearing today.
2. 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-30 of 2010 registered at Umargam Police Station, District Valsad for the offence punishable under Sections 436, 143 and 147 of the IPC.
3. At the outset, Mr Sunil C Patel, learned advocate for the applicants submits that he does not press the present application qua applicant Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5. Hence, the present application stands disposed of as not pressed qua applicant Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5. However, considering the fact that applicant No.2 is a female and applicant No.6 is aged person, the case of both the applicants be considered and they be enlarged on bail having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. Mr DC Sejpal, learned APP for the State, while opposing the bail application, submitted that applicant Nos. 2 and 4 abetted the main culprit in the commission of offence punishable under Sections 436, 143 and 147 of the IPC. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, no lenient view can be taken in the matter and as the charge-sheet is not filed, the application deserves to be rejected.
5. I have heard Mr Sunil C Patel, learned advocate for the applicants and Mr DC Sejpal, learned APP for the State at length and in great detail. I have considered the averments made in the application and the role attributed to applicant Nos. 2 and 6 as reflected in the FIR. Considering the same, provisions of Sections 436, 143 and 147 of the IPC, quantum of punishment, etc., I am of the view that applicant Nos. 2 and 6 deserve to be enlarged on bail.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this application is partly allowed and applicant Nos.2 and 6 are ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection with CR No. I-30 of 2010 registered at Umargam Police Station, District Valsad on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each [Rupees ten thousand only] with one surety each 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] The applicant No.6 shall mark his presence at the concerned police station on any day of every first week of English calendar month between 9.00 AM and 2.00 PM. till the trial is over;
[f] furnish the present address of their 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.
7. 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.
8. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.
9. 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 applicants on bail.
10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent qua applicant Nos.2 and 6. Rule is discharged qua applicant Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5. Direct service is permitted.
[H.B.ANTANI, J.] mrpandya Top