1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2013
  6. /
  7. January

Uday @ Lalo Yashvantbhai Vyas. ... vs State Of

High Court Of Gujarat|26 September, 2013
1. Heard learned APP Ms.Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent State.
2. Considering the facts on record as well as the certificate of Medical Officer of Central Jail Dispensary dated 25.9.2013, which confirms that petitioner requires operative treatment and the fact that petitioner has otherwise never applied for temporary bail or for parole for last three years. Though he is convicted u/ss.302, 201, 394 of the IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, on medical ground, it would be appropriate to release the petitioner on parole for few days, so as to enable him to take treatment according to his choice. yiHowever, considering the punishment, some strict conditions are required to be imposed upon the petitioner. For the purpose, petitioner s sister who is present before the Court has confirmed that they are ready and willing to furnish proper surety and since petitioner needs medical treatment and hospitalization, in place of the petitioner, such surety will mark his presence before the concerned police station, so as to avoid any unhealthy incident or commission of any other offence during the period of parole, if petitioner is released.
3. Therefore, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the request to release the petitioner on parole for 20 (Twenty) days on usual conditions with an additional condition that petitioner shall disclose the full details of the surety. The surety shall mark his presence before the Isanpur police station on every fourth day. The days of parole shall be counted from the actual date of release only.
4. Petitioner s sister, who is present before the Court has requested to direct the jail authority not to admit the petitioner on civil hospital since they want to take treatment on their own. Copy of this order shall be supplied to the learned APP and be communicated to jail authority through fax with a direction not to admit the petitioner in civil hospital unless there is some urgency. Rule is made absolute to that extent.
(S.G.SHAH, J.) binoy Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.