Yunus Mohammedbhai Mansuri vs State Of Gujarat on 14 June, 2022

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Yunus Mohammedbhai Mansuri vs State Of Gujarat on 14 June, 2022

Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel

      R/SCR.A/5551/2022                                ORDER DATED: 14/06/2022




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5551 of 2022

========================================================
                          YUNUS MOHAMMEDBHAI MANSURI
                                      Versus
                                STATE OF GUJARAT
========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAKBUL I MANSURI(2694) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MR LB DABHI ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                                 Date : 14/06/2022

                                  ORAL ORDER

1, Heard learned Advocate Mr. Makbul Mansuri on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. L.B. Dabhi on behalf of the respondents.

2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. L.B. Dabhi waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents.

3. By way of this application, the applicant seeks for being released on parole leave more particularly to attend the marriage ceremony of his son.

4. Jail remarks show that the present applicant has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code amongst others as well as under the provisions of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act as well as Explosive Substance Act, Information Technology Act and Arms Act etc. and sentenced to life imprisonment. While jail remarks show that the applicant has undergone imprisonment only for three months and Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Jun 15 21:12:09 IST 2022 R/SCR.A/5551/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/06/2022 17 days, it is informed by learned Advocate Mr. Mansuri on behalf of the applicant that while the applicant has actually remained in custody for more than 14 years, since the learned Sessions Court while sentencing the present applicant vide judgement and order dated 18.02.2022 had not granted set off in favour of the applicant for a period of imprisonment already undergone as an undertrial prisoner, therefore the present applicant is shown to have undergone imprisonment only for around 3 months and 17 days.

4.1 Learned Advocate Mr. Mansuri would further submit that the applicant had been released on atleast three occasions hereinbefore. Learned Advocate also relies upon the invitation card and other documents to show that infact the marriage ceremony is fixed between 17.06.2022 and 19.06.2022 and whereas the present applicant as father of the groom, may be permitted to attend the marriage ceremony.

5. This application is vehemently opposed by learned APP who would submit that the present applicant has been convicted for very serious offences. Learned APP would submit that it is on account of the seriousness of the offences that the learned Sessions Court inspite of the present applicant having undergone imprisonment for around 14 years approximately did not think it appropriate to grant set off. Learned APP would submit that in case if this Court were inclined to grant parole leave to the present applicant then the same may be with police escort.

6. In view of the submissions made by learned Advocates for the respective parties and more particularly considering the documents on record while this Court is inclined to release the present applicant on parole leave, having regard to the apprehension raised by the learned APP, the said release, would be with police escort.

Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Jun 15 21:12:09 IST 2022

R/SCR.A/5551/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/06/2022

7. In this view of the matter, present applicant is directed to be released on 16.06.2022 and whereas the applicant shall surrender back on 21.06.2022. It is directed that the present applicant shall be released with two police escort, at the cost of the applicant for the day of his release.

8. It is further directed that the present applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Police Station in which his residence is located and whereas in case of emergency need arises the applicant shall do so only after informing Police Inspector of the concerned Police Station .

The applicant convict to surrender before Jail Authority on completion of parole leave, without fail. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

The notification under Section 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall remain in abeyance during the period when the applicant shall be release on parole leave. Direct service is permitted.

Direct service is permitted.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) NIRU Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Jun 15 21:12:09 IST 2022

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court