Mohammedharun vs State

1. Rule.

Mr. Dabhi, learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent State. With consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing today.

2. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. It appears that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons and during the course of the investigation, the applicant was arrested. It is stated that no TI parade has been arranged. It also appears that similarly situated co-accused have been released on bail by this Court. Therefore, on the ground of parity also, the applicant is required to be enlarged on bail.

4. Considering the above aspects, the application deserves to be allowed.

5. The application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with Crime Register No.I 121 of 2009 of Vadodara Railway Police Station on his executing a bond of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the lower Court and subject to the conditions that he shall:

[a] not take undue advantage of his liberty or abuse his liberty;

[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;

[c] maintain law and order;

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

[e] furnish the address of his residence at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court;

[f] surrender his passport, if any, to the Lower Court, within a week.

6. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or to take appropriate action in the matter.

7. Bail before the Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.

8. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.

(BANKIM.N.MEHTA, J.) shekhar/-

Top