Gujarat High Court
Mohammed Kazim Shingati vs The Customs Superitendent (Aiu) & on 17 March, 2016
Author: Sonia Gokani
Bench: Sonia Gokani
R/SCR.A/914/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 914 of 2016
==========================================================
MOHAMMED KAZIM SHINGATI....Applicant(s)
Versus
THE CUSTOMS SUPERITENDENT (AIU) & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS RATNA VORA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SEJAL K MANDAVIA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
Mr.J.K.Shah, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
Date : 17/03/2016
ORAL ORDER
The applicant has approached this Court challenging the order dated 30th January, 2016 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 185 of 2016 by the Additional Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court No. 22, Ahmedabad.
During the course of hearing, Ms. Sejal Mandavia, learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.1 has pointed out that the order of bail granted in favour of the applicant has been cancelled by an order dated 22nd December, 2015 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 131 of 2015 by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate against this applicant. She has further Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Sat Mar 19 02:28:09 IST 2016 R/SCR.A/914/2016 ORDER submitted that the applicant has also preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 420 of 2015 which is yet not decided. She has therefore urged that as order of bail itself has been cancelled subsequent order for modify condition in bail order may not have any sustainability till that earlier order is set aside. on this issue. Therefore, she has urged that the Criminal Revision Application needs to be heard and decided firstly.
Ms.Ratna vora, learned advocate appearing for the applicant has urged that the Criminal Revision Application is yet not listed for final hearing.
Considering the grievance of the applicant and bearing in mind the fact that the applicant worked for about 20 years at Saudi Arabia and his family is residing there, he has also pointed out urgency in this matter, the Criminal Revision Application needs to be decided at the first point of time and that too, without further loss of time within a fortnight from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
At this stage, this petition is not being entertained. If the applicant is aggrieved by the outcome of the Criminal Revision Application, he shall be at liberty to take legal recourse which is Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Sat Mar 19 02:28:09 IST 2016 R/SCR.A/914/2016 ORDER available with him. This Court has not gone into the merits of this application and only on account of pendency of the Criminal Revision Application before the Revisional Court, has chosen to dispose of by this petition.
Copy of this order be given to the learned advocate appearing for the applicant.
With the above directions, this petition stands disposed of.
Direct service is permitted.
(MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) BINA Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Sat Mar 19 02:28:09 IST 2016