Gujarat High Court
Aslam vs State on 14 October, 2008
Author: H.B.Antani
Bench: H.B.Antani
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/1223720/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 12237 of 2008
==================================================
ASLAM
@ BODIO HYDERMIYA SHAIKH - Applicant
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Respondent
==================================================Appearance
:
MR SP MAJMUDAR for the
Applicant.
MR AJ DESAI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent.
==================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 14/10/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. RULE.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. A. J. Desai waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for hearing today.
2. This is an application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with CR bearing No. I-71 of 2008 registered with Panigate Police Station, District:- Vadodara for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 332, 337, 504, 506 (2), 152, 153(A), 395, 295A, 294B, 435, 436, 427 and 298 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned Advocate Mr. S. P. Majmudar for the petitioner submitted that other accused who are also involved in the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 332, 337, 504, 506 (2), 152, 153(A), 395, 295A, 294B, 435, 436, 427 and 298 of the Indian Penal Code are released on bail after the withdrawal of the earlier petition by the petitioner and, therefore, it is a change in circumstance which would warrant interference by this Court and in that view of the matter, the prayer, as set out in the petition, be granted.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. A. J. Desai representing the respondent State submitted that considering the role attributed to the petitioner which is reflected in the FIR at Annexure-A to the petition and the manner in which he has committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 332, 337, 504, 506 (2), 152, 153(A), 395, 295A, 294B, 435, 436, 427 and 298 of the Indian Penal Code, no discretionary relief be granted to the petitioner and the petition deserves to be dismissed out of hand.
5. I have heard learned Advocate Mr. S. P. Majmudar for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. A. J. Desai for the respondent State at length and in great detail. I have perused the averments made in the petition as well as the FIR at Annexure-A to the petition. The petitioner is booked for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 332, 337, 504, 506 (2), 152, 153(A), 395, 295A, 294B, 435, 436, 427 and 298 of the Indian Penal Code. I have also considered the antecedents of the petitioner which is 21 in number and this Court cannot be oblivious to the aforesaid fact including the detention of the petitioner in PASA matters on four occasions. I have further considered the submissions canvassed by the learned Advocate Mr. Majmudar that even the other accused who are having past antecedents are released on bail and therefore, considering the same, on the ground of parity in the matter, the petitioner be released on bail. However, considering the role attributed to the petitioner, the past antecedents, the manner in which the alleged offences are committed by the petitioner and the quantum of punishment, etc, I am not inclined to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner.
6. For the foregoing reasons, the petition fails and it is rejected. Rule is discharged.
[H. B. ANTANI, J.] /shamnath Top