Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.MA/8048/2008 3/ 3 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 8048 of 2008 ========================================================= JIGNESH @ JAGO MAVJIBHAI PARMAR & 1 - Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR HN JHALA for Applicant(s) : 1 - 2. MR. M.R.MENGDEY ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 30/09/2008 ORAL ORDER
Present application is filed by the petitioners-original accused under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on bail in connection with compliant being C.R. No. I-C.R. No. 444 of 2007 registered with Naranpura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323, 294(a),114 of the IPC and under Section 135 (1) of the Bombay Police Act.
2. This application is sufficiently adjourned at least for 9 times and all throughout the learned advocate for the petitioners is on leave note and / or sick note. Today also, it is reported that there is a leave note of Shri Zala, learned advocate for the petitioners. As the present application for bail is sufficiently adjourned, it is taken up for hearing today ex-parte.
3. Petitioners are charged for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323, 294(a),114 of the IPC and under Section 135 (1) of the Bombay Police Act and each accused has been attributed specific role in committing the offences. It appears that, it is the contention on behalf of the petitioners that looking to the injuries mentioned in the postmortem report, it cannot be said that the petitioners are responsible for the death of the deceased. However, considering the role attributed to the petitioners, they have beaten the deceased by kicks and fists blows and they dashed the head of the deceased against the wall and looking to the seriousness and gravity of the offences alleged and the punishment which can be imposed, according to this Court this is not a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioners. At present it is not possible to consider the separate role of the applicant and all the accused. It appears from statement and allegations in the FIR all the accused have participated in committing the offences which has resulted into the death of the husband of the complainant. Under the circumstances, present application deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.
(M.R.SHAH, J.) kaushik Top