Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Lalsinh vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|16 June, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL) Rule.
Mr.Pandya, learned APP waives notice of Rule.
The present application has been preferred by the applicant who is the original accused and respondent in Criminal Appeal No.1995/10 which has been preferred by the State against the judgement and order of the learned Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.104/09, whereby the applicant was acquitted, but his appeal was admitted and the bailable warrant was issued for a sum of Rs.10,000/-. When he presented himself before the police station upon the information received by him from his co-accused, since bail bond or surety could not be furnished, he has been put up in the lockup and thereafter, he has preferred the present application.
It is undisputed position that he was acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge. It is true that the appeal has been preferred against the order of acquittal, but the appeal is still to be finally heard and decided. The family condition of the applicant appears to be very poor. The purpose of issuing bailable warrant after admission of the appeal is to secure the presence of the respondent-accused so that in the event this Court allows the appeal, effective order for putting the accused behind bar can be passed.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly, the financial condition of the applicant, we find that ends of justice would be met if the applicant is released on executing personal bond of Rs.5000/-.
Under the circumstances, the applicant be released, unless his presence is required for any other lawful purpose, on executing the personal bond of Rs.5000/- with the further direction that he shall remain present either himself or through the authorised advocate in the proceeding of Criminal Appeal No.1995/10 as and when it is taken up for final hearing. It is also observed that in the event the applicant is not having financial capacity to engage an advocate, it would also be open to the applicant to apply for State Legal Aid for engagement of the advocate at the cost of the Government and if such application is made, the appropriate legal aid shall also be provided to him.
Application allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule made absolute accordingly.
(JAYANT PATEL, J.) (PARESH UPADHYAY, J.) *bjoy Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Lalsinh vs State

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
16 June, 2012