By way of present successive bail application, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the present applicant has prayed to release him on regular bail in connection with the offence registered as C.R. No.I-77 of 2011 registered with Songadh Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 393, 324, 120-B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard Mr.Aftabhusen Ansari, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.H.L. Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
Mr.Ansari, learned counsel for the applicant, states that the applicant is innocent and has not committed the alleged offence. He has further contended that the applicant is not named in the FIR. Even prima-facie case is not made out against the present applicant. He has further contended that this is a simple case of Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. The injured was discharged from the hospital on the same day. He has further contended that the co-accused has already been released by this Court and therefore, on the ground of parity also, present applicant is required to be released on regular bail.
As against this, Mr.H.L. Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has vehemently opposed the present application and contended that earlier the applicant has withdrawn the application for bail. He has also contended that this is a successive bail application after filing of charge-sheet. He has also contended that there is no new ground in the present application except the ground of parity. He has further contended that there is no substance in the present application and hence, present application is required to be rejected.
Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused papers produced before me. It is very clear from the papers that this is a successive bail application. Earlier the applicant has withdrawn the bail application after filing of charge-sheet. The said application was withdrawn because this Court was not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. This is a successive bail application after filing of charge-sheet. There is no new ground in the present application except the ground of parity. I have perused the role of the co-accused and the present application. I have not found any substance in the present application to entertain the application. Hence, the present application is required to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged.
(Z.
K. Saiyed, J) Anup Top