Skip to content


Your query did not yield any results, below auto-suggested results might help!

Sapara Shankarbhai Ramubhai and anr. Vs, State of Gujarat. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtGujarat High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 646 of 2011.
Judge
ActsWildlife (Protection) Act
AppellantSapara Shankarbhai Ramubhai and anr.
RespondentState of Gujarat.
Appellant AdvocateMR YJ PATEL, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateMR JK SHAH, Adv.
Excerpt:
[markandey katju ; gyan sudha misra, jj.] - code of civil procedure (c.p.c.) 1908 - section 151 - saving of inherent powers of court -- this appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 21.5.2004 passed by learned single judge of the patna high court in civil revision no. 945 of 2002. while the aforesaid partition suit was pending, the defendants smt. pushpa biswas and apurva kumar biswas executed a general power of attorney on 31.7.1992 in favour of umesh chandra and dr. sanjeev kumar mishra and the same was registered. pushpa biswas and apurva kumar biswas cannot be allowed to say that their own act of signing the compromise petition was collusive and fraudulent. the high court has observed that defendants nos. 2 and 2a viz., pushpa biswas and apurva kumar biswas..........conditions.2. considering the above submissions, i find that the petitioners are required to be released on bail, pending trial. however, considering the fact that they are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under the wildlife (protection) act, 1972, in the bird sanctuary of nal sarovar, they should be kept out of the said area to prevent future repetition of such incidents, till the trial is over. under the circumstances, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in connection with ranagadh round crime no. 1 of 2010/2011, registered with limbdi police station, district : surendranagar, on their furnishing bond of rs. 20,000/-(rupees twenty thousand), with one surety of the like amount, by each of them, to the satisfaction of the lower court and subject to the.....
Judgment:
1. RULE. Learned APP, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. The offences alleged against them are punishable under the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the maximum punishment prescribed under the law is of three years imprisonment. He, therefore, submitted that the petitioners may be released on suitable conditions.

2. Considering the above submissions, I find that the petitioners are required to be released on bail, pending trial. However, considering the fact that they are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, in the bird Sanctuary of Nal Sarovar, they should be kept out of the said area to prevent future repetition of such incidents, till the trial is over. Under the circumstances, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in connection with Ranagadh Round Crime NO. 1 of 2010/2011, registered with LIMBDI POLICE STATION, District : Surendranagar, on their furnishing bond of Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand), with one surety of the like amount, by EACH of them, to the satisfaction of the lower Court and subject to the conditions that, they shall:

(1). not take undue advantage of their liberty or abuse their liberty;

(2). not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

(3). maintain law and order;

(4). mark their presence before the concerned Police Station on every 1^st and 15^th day of English Calendar month between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.;

(5). not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

(6). furnish the address of their residence at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court;

(7). surrender their passports, if any, to the Lower Court immediately,

(8) NOT ENTER within the limits of Viramgam and Limbdi Talukas till the trial is over, except, for the purpose of attending the Court proceedings, without prior permission of the concerned Court.

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

4. Bail before the Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.

5. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.


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