Gujarat High Court
Vikram Mathurbhai Koli Patel vs State Of Gujarat & on 2 February, 2018
Author: Sonia Gokani
Bench: Sonia Gokani
R/CR.MA/2686/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR TEMPORARY BAIL) NO. 2686 of
2018
In CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 543 of 2017
==========================================================
VIKRAM MATHURBHAI KOLI PATEL....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. NISARG D SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KP RAVAL, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
Date : 02/02/2018
ORAL ORDER
1. This is an application by the applicant- convict, who is undergoing sentence of 7 years in connection with Sessions Case No. 100 of 2015, inflicted by Addl. Sessions Court, Ahmedabad (Rural), for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, for grant of temporary bail for 30 days.
2. Learned Advocate, Mr. Shah, appearing for the applicant has fervently urged that he is the only maternal uncle, and therefore, his presence is must. It is pointed out from the invitation card that his name is also reflecting Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Fri Feb 02 23:34:30 IST 2018 R/CR.MA/2686/2018 ORDER along with his wife's. He, further, has urged that earlier he was granted temporary bail and parole leave and he has not given any cause of concern to the authorities.
3. This Court has heard the learned APP, who has objected to this application, after seeking instructions from the IO concerned.
4. Having heard the learned Advocates on both the sides and considering the fact that the applicant was released on parole twice, in the recent past, i.e. from 06.10.2017 to 15.10.2017 and again from 10.01.2018 to 19.01.2018. Moreover, considering the short period of sentence, which he has undergone, so also the seriousness of the offence, this Court is not inclined to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant for the cause for which he has approached this Court.
5. Resultantly, this application fails and is REJECTED. Rule is discharged.
(MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) UMESH Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Fri Feb 02 23:34:30 IST 2018