Allowed

Soyebkhan Valikhan Pathan v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC12 Jul 2019CR.MA/5510/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Gujarat allowed a regular bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC. The applicant was held in jail since December 2018 in a murder case where he acted as a intermediary. The court considered the concluded investigation, the applicant's role, and relied on Supreme Court law to grant bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with one surety of the like amount on jurisdictional conditions.

Soyebkhan Valikhan Pathan Vs State of Gujarat — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Gujarat HC (2019)

¶1

R/CR.MA/5510/2019 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5510 of 2019

¶4

=======================================================

¶5

SOYEBKHAN VALIKHAN PATHAN

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶8

=======================================================

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

NANAVATI AND CO.(7105) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NIYANT R BHIMANI(8000) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JIGAR D DAVE(6528) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR RONAK RAVAL APP(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶11

=======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

¶13

Date : 12/07/2019

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

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-66/2018 registered with Sanand GIDC Police Station, Ahmedabad (Rural) for offence under Sections 302, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

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.

¶17

3. Learned APP, Mr. Raval appearing on behalf of the respondent-State as well as learned advocate, Mr. Jigar Dave appearing for the original complainant have opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. Learned advocate, Mr. Dave appearing for the original complainant has referred to the affidavit filed by

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

R/CR.MA/5510/2019 ORDER

¶20

the original complainant and submitted that
considering the facts of the present case, the
present application may not be entertained.

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

6. This Court has considered following aspects,

¶24

(a) the applicant is in jail since 07.12.2018;

¶25

(b) the investigation is concluded and the chargesheet is filed;

¶26

(c)from the investigation papers, it is revealed
that the case of the prosecution is that the
applicant has worked as Mediator between the
co-accused, Ibrahimkhan @ Ibho Jainkhan
Pathan and Abib Ganda and an amount of
Rs.6.00 lakhs was given to the co-accused,
Ibrahimkhan through the present applicant.
However, it is required to be noted that it
is not alleged against the applicant that he
was present when the incident in question has
taken place and the applicant has caused any
injury to the deceased;

¶27

(d) though the prosecution has placed reliance upon the details of CDRs, it is required to

¶28

Page 2 of 4

¶29

R/CR.MA/5510/2019 ORDER

¶30

be noted that all the accused are of the same
village and the applicant and the co-accused
were in constant touch with each other even
much prior to the date of incident.

¶31

Thus looking to the role attributed to the
present applicant, I am inclined to consider the
case of the applicant.

¶32

7.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.

¶33

8.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-
66/2018 registered with Sanand GIDC Police
Station, Ahmedabad (Rural) 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;

¶34

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

[e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station between 1^st to 10^th day of every English calendar month for a period of six

¶39

Page 3 of 4

¶40

R/CR.MA/5510/2019 ORDER

¶41

months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;

¶42

[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;

¶43

9. 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.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.)

¶48

Gautam

¶49

Page 4 of 4

Soyebkhan Valikhan Pathan v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soyebkhan Valikhan Pathan v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vipul @ Kano Bhupatbhai Chauhan Vs State of Gujarat

Akrambhai Hanifbhai Dasadiya Vs State of Gujarat

Jitubhai Velabha Gadhvi Vs State of Gujarat

Praveenbhai @ Bhaijibhai Ravjibhai Baraiya Vs State of Gujarat

Kailashben W/O Ashoksinh Takhatsinh Chavda Vs State of Gujarat

Vijay Hargovanbhai Joshi(Shirvadiya) Vs State of Gujarat