Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Sanjay Harishbhai Punjawani vs State Of Gujarat on 25 February, 2015
Bench: T.S. Thakur, Prafulla C. Pant
1
ITEM NO.104 COURT NO.2 SECTION IIB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s). 534/2011
SANJAY HARISHBHAI PUNJAWANI & ANR Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. Respondent(s)
Date : 25/02/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT
For Appellant(s) Mr. K. L. Janjani,Adv.
Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv.
MS. Jesal, Adv.
MS. Giss Antony, Adv.
Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Adv.
Ms. Puja Sharma,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera)
Court Master Court Master
(Signed order is placed on the file) Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Shashi Sareen Date: 2015.02.28 06:16:26 IST Reason: 2 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 534 OF 2011 SANJAY HARISHBHAI PUNJAWANI AND ANR. ... Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. ... Respondent(s) O R D E R This appeal arises out of an order dated 30.09.2006 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Crl.Misc. Application No. 11510 of 2010 The appeal arise in the following circumstance:
CR-1 No. 68 of 2010 for offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been registered at Police Station Chandkheda. The appellants who happened to be the husband and mother-in-law of the complainant-wife appear to have applied for grant of regular bail which application was allowed by the Trial Court in terms of its order dated 05.07.2010 subject to certain conditions including the condition that the appellants shall not leave the local limits of 3 Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad District till completion of the trial and without prior permission of the Trial Court.
Aggrieved by the condition imposed by the Trial Court the appellant preferred Crl Misc. Application No. 11510 of 2010 before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in which the High Court by an order dated 28.09.2010 directed modification of the order passed by the Trial Court and while deleting condition No.4 regarding surrender of pass-port directed that the appellant shall not leave the State of Gujarat and Maharashtra till completion of the trial without prior permission of the trial. That direction was subsequently modified by the High Court in terms of an order dated 30.09.2010 by which condition No. 4 regarding surrender of pass-port was once again restored.
Aggrieved, the present appeal calls in question the correctness of the matter. When the matter came up before us initially on 29.10.2010 we had while issuing notice to the respondent directed that the pass-port deposited by the appellants shall be released in their favour. We are today informed by learned counsel for the appellants that the pass-ports were pursuant to the 4 said direction released in favour of the appellants and that even though the appellants are ordinarily residing in Dubai they are regularly attending the hearing before the Trial Court. That position is not disputed by learned counsel for the respondent-State. In that view we see no reason why the order dated 29.10.2010 releasing the pass-port in favour of them should not be made absolute subject to the condition that the appellants will continue to appear before the Trial Court as and when required by that Court. We accordingly allow this appeal set aside the order passed by the High Court and direct that the pass-port released in favour of the appellants shall continue to be released in their favour subject to the condition that they shall appear before the Trial Court as and when so required by that Court.
......................J. (T.S.THAKUR) ......................J. (PRAFULLA C.PANT) New Delhi, February 25, 2015.