Rule.
Mr.H.L.Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.
The applicants-original accused of Sessions Case No.26 of 2008, who are convicted by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhuj-Kutch for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 306 and 114 of Indian Penal Code, have filed the present application for bail. The applicants are sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 2 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to further undergo 2 months S.I. under Section 498(A) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard Mr.Nashir Saiyed, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr.H.L.Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
Mr.Saiyed has contended that the applicants are wrongly convicted under Sections 498(A) and 114 of the IPC. The evidence on record are not appreciated in its true perspective and wrongly convicted the applicants for the offence which is not committed by them. It is also contended that the present applicants are granted bail for one month by the learned trial Judge. The fine amount is deposited before the trial Court. He has, therefore, contended that the application may kindly be allowed by releasing the applicants on bail pending the appeal.
I have gone through the papers produced before me as well as the judgment and order passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhuj-Kutch.
Looking to the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to grant the bail to the applicants. Hence, the applicants are ordered to be released on bail pending hearing and disposal of the main appeal on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- each and a surety of the like amount each on usual terms and conditions. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(Z.
K. SAIYED, J) kks Top