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

Sonalben vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|25 June, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. Rule, Mr.Kodekar, learned APP appears and waives service of notice of rule for the respondent-State.
2. The instant application is filed by two applicants-lady accused persons seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Vaso Police Station, Nadiad, District-Kheda C.R.No. I-40/2012 regarding the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 r/w 114 of the IPC.
3. Mr. Modi, learned Advocate for the applicants-lady accused persons took me through the relevant parts of the FIR and submitted that in the instant matter, no demand was made by the applicants nor any amount was accepted from the complainant nor anything came to be recovered from any of the applicants. It is further submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the applicants being lady accused persons, the application may be granted.
4. Heard Mr. Kodekar, learned APP for the respondent-State.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both the sides, so also considering the relevant parts of the FIR and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the application deserves to be allowed.
6. Learned counsel for the parties do not press for further reasoned order.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and the applicants are ordered to be released on bail in connection with F.I.R. being Vaso Police Station, Nadiad, District-Kheda C.R.No. I-40/2012, on executing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that they 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 India without prior permission of the trial Court concerned;
(e) furnish the present address of residence to the I.O. and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the trial Court.
8. The Authorities will release the applicants only if not required in connection with any other offence for the time being.
9. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the trial Court concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
10. Bail bond to be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try the case.
11. For modification and/or deletion of any of the conditions herein above, the applicants will be at liberty to approach the concerned Court and such Court shall decide the application for modification and/or deletion of any of the conditions of this order in accordance with law.
12. 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 applicants on bail.
13. Rule is made absolute accordingly. The application is disposed of.
14. Direct service is permitted.
(J.C.UPADHYAYA, J.) Ashish N.
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

Sonalben vs State

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
25 June, 2012