Allowed

Murtuza Ajmal Sheikh v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC9 Dec 2021CR.MA/17800/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the High Court of Gujarat allowed an appeal for regular bail under Section 439 CrPC in an NDPS case. The court relied on the completed investigation, co-accused release, and duration of detention to enlarge the appellant on bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was ordered to be released on regular bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000 with one surety of the same amount, conditioned with restrictions on movement and passport surrend

Murtuza Ajmal Sheikh Vs State of Gujarat — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

R/CR.MA/17800/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/12/2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 17800 of 2021

¶4

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

MURTUZA AJMAL SHEIKH

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT

================================================== Appearance:

¶9

ARMANKHAN A GHASURA(8376) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR MANAN MEHTA, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA M. SAREEN

¶12

Date : 09/12/2021

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent – State.

¶15

[1] The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant for regular bail in connection with an FIR being C.R.No.I- 11210030210650 of 2021 registered with Mahidharpura Police Station, District: Surat for the offences under Sections 370(2), 370(4), 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

[2] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the

¶17

Page 1 of 4

¶18

R/CR.MA/17800/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/12/2021

¶19

applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

¶20

[3] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.

¶21

[4] I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not invite reasoned order.

¶22

[5] This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra versus Central Bureau Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.

¶23

[6] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made aginst the applicant in the FIR, I am of the opinion that discretion is required to be exercised in favour of the applicant and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

¶24

[7] This Court has considering the following aspects:

¶25

(i) Investigation is over and charge sheet is filed.

¶26

(ii) Co-accused having similar role has been enlarged by this Court.

¶27

(iii) Applicant is in jail since 17.04.2021.

¶28

Page 2 of 4

¶29

R/CR.MA/17800/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/12/2021

¶30

[8] In the result, the present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with an offence being C.R.No.I- 11210030210650 of 2021 registered with Mahidharpura Police Station, District: Surat on executing a personal bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that the applicant shall;

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

[e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station once between 1^st and 15^th day of every English calendar month for a period of six months.;

¶36

[f] furnish latest and permanent 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;

¶37

[g] not leave the district limit of Surat for a period of 6 months;

¶38

Page 3 of 4

¶39

R/CR.MA/17800/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/12/2021

¶40

[h] file an undertaking disclosing his residential address with supporting documents and his mobile number.

¶41

[9] The authorities shall adhere to its own Circular relating to COVID-19 and, thereafter, 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.

¶42

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

¶43

(RAJENDRA M. SAREEN,J)

¶44

DRASHTI K. SHUKLA

¶45

Page 4 of 4

Murtuza Ajmal Sheikh v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murtuza Ajmal Sheikh 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

Mukeshbhai Nanjibhai Ninama Vs State of Gujarat

Savaji S/O. Kantibhai Devipujak Vs State of Gujarat

Ghanshyam @ Ghanti Jagjivandas Danidhariya Vs State of Gujarat

Vishal @ Vishu S/O Sureshbhai Mangaldas Hadiyel Vs State of Gujarat

Jayeshbhai Anilbhai Rathod Vs State of Gujarat

Mohammad Arbaz @ Tebri Aslam Shaikh Vs State of Gujarat