SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Nikulsinh S/O Bahadursinh … vs State Of Gujarat on 23 August, 2018

R/CR.MA/15475/2018 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 15475 of 2018

NIKULSINH S/O BAHADURSINH KESRISINH PARMAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR MITESH AMIN, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the RESPONDENT(s) No.
1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

Date : 23/08/2018

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule.  Mr. Mitesh Amin, learned Public Prosecutor waives service 
of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent­State.

1. Heard Mr. A. M. Dagli, learned advocate, for the applicant and 
Mr. Mitesh Amin,  learned Public Prosecutor, for the  respondent­
State.

2. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal 
Procedure for regular bail in connection with F.I.R. registered as 
C.R.   No.   I   ­   33     of   2018   with   Dhokla   Town   Police   Station, 
District   :   Ahmedabad,  for   the   offences   punishable  under 
Sections 306, 498A, 323 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and 
Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that considering the 
nature of offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail 
by imposing suitable conditions.

Page 1 of 3

R/CR.MA/15475/2018 ORDER

4. The learned APP opposes the grant of bail looking to the nature 
and gravity of offences.

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

6. I   have   heard   learned   advocates   appearing   for   the   parties   and 
perused the papers of investigation.  This Court has considered the 
fact that charge sheet is filed after completion of investigation and 
marriage   span   is   of   9   years   and   the   allegations   are   general   in 
nature against present applicant.

7. In   the   facts   and   circumstances   of   the   case   and   considering   the 
nature of allegations made in the FIR and without discussing the 
evidence in details as well as without going into details, prima­
facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise 
the   discretion   to   enlarge   the   applicant   on   bail.   Hence,   the 
application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released 
on bail in connection with C.R. No. I ­ 33  of 2018 with Dhokla 
Town Police Station, District : Ahmedabad, on executing a bond 
of  Rs.15,000/­(Rupees Fifteen 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   injuries   to   the   interest   of   the 
prosecution;

[c]  surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;

[d]  not leave the India without prior permission of the Sessions 
Judge concerned;

Page 2 of 3
R/CR.MA/15475/2018 ORDER

[e]  mark   presence   at   the   concerned   police   station   on  every 

Monday for a period of three months and thereafter on any 
day   of   each   English   Calender   Month   for   a   period   of   one 
year;

[f]  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 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. 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.

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

(R.P.DHOLARIA, J)
DRASHTI K. SHUKLA

Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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

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