Skip to content


Sandipkumar Pankajbhai Patel. Vs. State of Gujarat. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtGujarat High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 15629 of 2010.
Judge
ActsCode of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 439; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 363, 366, 114
AppellantSandipkumar Pankajbhai Patel.
RespondentState of Gujarat.
Appellant AdvocateMRMPSHAH; MS. KRUTI M SHAH, Advs.
Respondent AdvocateMR KARTIK PANDYA, Adv.
Excerpt:
.....that the respondents herein were never regularly promoted as hindi officer at any point of time either under the 1984 rules or recruitment rules, 2002. 12. rules under article 309 can be changed even during the subsistence of the old rules. 13. it is well settled that the legislature can legislate retrospectively vide m.p.v. sundararamier & co. vs. state of andhra pradesh, air 1958 sc 468, j.k. jute mills vs. state of uttar pradesh, air 1961 sc 1534, jadao bahuji vs. municipal committee, air 1961 sc 1486, government of andhra pradesh vs. hindustan machine tools ltd., air 1975 sc 2037 (para 8), nandumal girdharilal vs. state of uttar pradesh, air 1992 sc 2084, etc. there is no quarrel over the proposition of law that the normal rule is that the vacancy prior to the new rules would..........has also received injury. therefore she submitted that considering the facts and circumstances, present application deserves to be allowed as now charge sheet has been filed.4. learned additional public prosecutor mr.pandya resisted the application and submitted that as it transpires from her statement involvement of the present applicant is prima facie established as she was in his custody for some time and exploited.5. in view of rival submissions, it is required to be considered whether the present application can be entertained or not.6. it is well settled that this court is not required to appreciate and scrutinize evidence in detail at this stage. however, for considering the prima facie case, relevant aspects like nature of offence, manner in which it is alleged to have been.....
Judgment:
1. The present application has been filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, after the charge sheet is filed.

2. The applicant is charged with having committed offence sections 363, 366 and 114 of Indian Penal Code for which F.I.R. being I-C.R.No.194 of 2010 has been registered with Sarkhej Police Station, Ahmedabad.

3. Learned advocate Ms.Shah for the applicant accused submitted that as per order passed earlier the habeas corpus petition has been disposed of today and the corpus could not remain present as she has been admitted in the hospital as she has received burn injuries. She submitted that she has been residing with somebody else who has also received injury. Therefore she submitted that considering the facts and circumstances, present application deserves to be allowed as now charge sheet has been filed.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Pandya resisted the application and submitted that as it transpires from her statement involvement of the present applicant is prima facie established as she was in his custody for some time and exploited.

5. In view of rival submissions, it is required to be considered whether the present application can be entertained or not.

6. It is well settled that this Court is not required to appreciate and scrutinize evidence in detail at this stage. However, for considering the prima facie case, relevant aspects like nature of offence, manner in which it is alleged to have been committed, role attributed, statement of victim, injury sustained, medical evidence etc., are required to be considered. Therefore, having regard to the aforesaid aspects prima facie case is suggested. At the same time, without any further elaboration, present application deserves to be allowed in light of settled principles regarding grant of bail.

7. Accordingly, present application stands allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with F.I.R. being I-C.R.No.194 of 2010 registered with Sarkhej Police Station, Ahmedabad, on his executing bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the lower Court and subject to the conditions that he shall:

(a) Not take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty.

(b) Not to try to tamper or pressurize the prosecution witnesses or complainant in any manner.

(c) Not act in any manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution.

(d) Maintain law and order and should cooperate the investigating officers.

(e) Mark his presence before concerned Police Station on every 1^st day of English calender month between 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM till the trial commences.

(f) Furnish the address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change his residence without prior permission of the Court.

(g) Surrender his passport, if any, to the lower Court, within a week.

8. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the concerned Sessions Judge will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.

9. Bail before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It would be open to the trial Court concerned to give time to furnish the solvency certificate if prayed for.

10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //