1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2011
  6. /
  7. January

Prem vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|27 April, 2011


Learned APP - Mr. J.K. Shah waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent - State.
This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with First Information Report registered as I-C.R. No.200/2010 with Karelibaug Police Station, Vadodara for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 386, 387, 506(2), 507 and 114 of Indian Penal Code.
Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that one of the main allegations against the applicant is of being a close aid of one notorious Mukesh Harjani indulged into seeking ransom and in the past one FIR being C.R. No.I-29 of 2010 registered with D.C.B. Police Station against the applicant and C.R. No.I-135 of 2010 registered with Karelibaugh Police Station against co-accused. Barring the above at this stage no other role surfaces on record and, therefore, the accused be enlarged on bail.
Learned APP submits that in one of the co-accused case, learned Single Judge of this Court has not entertained the application and the counsel appearing for the co-accused had withdrawn the said application. Learned APP further submits that one Ramesh Hande was killed within four days of the statement given by him involving one Mr. Mukesh Harjani and considering the above circumstances when the applicant herein is a close aid of said Mukesh Harjai, the applicant do not deserve any benefit under Section 439 of the Code.
Having heard learned counsels and considering the fact that now charge-sheet is filed and investigation is over and no material surfaces on record connecting the applicant in any manner with murder of one Ramesh Hande. Besides, allegations against the applicant are of being close aid and in contact with one Mukesh Harjani and prima faice when in earlier case for which FIR's have been registered the applicant have been bailed out.
Learned Counsels for the parties do not press for further reasoned order.
Considering the above prima facie aspects of the matter, I find this is a fit case for granting bail since charge-sheet is also filed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with First Information Report registered as I-C.R. No.200/2010 with Karelibaug Police Station, Vadodara, on executing a bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;
a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;
d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;
e) mark presence at the concerned Police Station on the first Sunday of every month between 10.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. for three months only;
f) furnish the present 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 the residence without prior permission of this Court;
g) not enter within the City and District limits of Vadodara for three months, except, for the purpose of attending the trial or marking presence.
The authorities will release the applicant only if not required in connection with any other offence for the time being.
If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
Bail bond to be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try the case.
At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.
Rule made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.
(Anant S. Dave, J.) Caroline 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.

Prem vs State


High Court Of Gujarat

27 April, 2011