SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mahendra Raijiji Thakor vs State Of Gujarat on 13 March, 2019

R/CR.MA/3223/2019 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 3223 of 2019

MAHENDRA RAIJIJI THAKOR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR NIRAL R MEHTA(3001) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. HARDIK P BAROT(6798) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR LB DABHI, APP(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

Date : 13/03/2019

ORAL ORDER

1. The present application is filed under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in
connection with FIR being C.R.No.I-90 of 2018
registered with Santej Police Station,
Gandhinagar for offence under Sections 498A,
306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
applicant submits that considering the nature
of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged
on regular bail by imposing suitable
conditions.

3. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the
respondent-State has opposed grant of regular
bail looking to the nature and gravity of the
offence.

Page 1 of 4

R/CR.MA/3223/2019 ORDER

4. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the
respective parties do not press for further
reasoned order.

5. Having heard the learned advocates for the
parties and perusing the material placed on
record and taking into consideration the
facts of the case, nature of allegations,
gravity of offences, role attributed to the
accused, without discussing the evidence in
detail, this Court is of the opinion that
this is a fit case to exercise the discretion
and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
This Court has also considered the aspects
that; (i) the applicant is in jail since
30.11.2018; (ii) the chargesheet is filed;

(iii) from the material collected during the
course of investigation, it is revealed that
the allegations are mainly levelled against
father-in-law and mother-in-law of the
deceased; (iv) even so far as the present
applicant-husband is concerned, no specific
role is attributed to him; (v) I have
considered the statement given by the
witnesses Savitaben w/o Vishnuji Thakore and
other statements of the witnesses, from which
it is revealed that the allegations are
mainly levelled against the father-in-law and
mother-in-law and in view of the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the case, this

Page 2 of 4
R/CR.MA/3223/2019 ORDER

application is allowed.

6. This Court has also taken into consideration
the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court
in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central
Bureau of Investigation, reported in [2012] 1
SCC 40.

7. Hence, the present application is allowed.

The applicant is ordered to be released on
regular bail in connection with FIR being
C.R.No.I-90 of 2018 registered with Santej
Police Station, Gandhinagar on executing a
personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
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 India without prior
permission of the Sessions Judge
concerned;

[e] mark presence before the concerned
Police Station between 1st to 10th day
of every English calendar month for a
period of six months between 11:00
a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;

Page 3 of 4
R/CR.MA/3223/2019 ORDER

[f] furnish the present address of
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;

8. The authorities will release the applicant
only if he is 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. It will be open
for the concerned Court to delete, modify
and/or relax any of the above conditions, in
accordance with law.

9. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be
influenced by the prima facie observations
made by this Court in the present order.

10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid
extent. Direct service is permitted.

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J)
SRILATHA

Page 4 of 4

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation