Allowed

Ravikumar Harishchandraprasad Bhumihar v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC11 Feb 2021SCR.A/428/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an RSCA filed by a convict detained through jail. The court directed the District Magistrate, Ahmedabad, to forward the opinion regarding early release under Section 438(A) CrPC to the concerned committee within three months, holding the delay was negligent.

What did the court decide?

District Magistrate, Ahmedabad directed to send opinion to concerned committee within three months.

Ravikumar Harishchandraprasad Bhumihar Vs State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

R/SCR.A/428/2021 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 428 of 2021

¶4

================================================================ RAVIKUMAR HARISHCHANDRAPRASAD BHUMIHAR

¶5

Versus

¶6

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

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

¶8

THROUGH JAIL(50) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 MS MOXA THAKKER APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶9

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

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER

¶11

Date : 11/02/2021

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

Heard Ms.Moxa Thakker, learned APP for the respondent – State through video conferencing.

¶14

This application has been filed by the applicant through jail seeking necessary directions to the District Magistrate for sending his opinion to the committee as the application has been filed on 03.10.2019 and yet, the District Magistrate has not sent its opinion and due to that the convict is not in a position to get any relief under Section 438(A) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

¶15

Now, on perusal of the material evidence placed on record, it appears that the averment made in the application that the applicant has filed an application on 03.10.2019 for his early release under Section 438(A) of the Criminal Procedure Code and due to non-submission of the necessary opinion and report by the District Magistrate, the

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

R/SCR.A/428/2021 ORDER

¶18

concerned committee is not able to decide the application of the convict. This fact clearly suggests that there is negligent on the part of the District Magistrate, Ahmedabad in not forwarding its opinion in time. In view of the above, the application requires to be consideration.

¶19

In view of the above, the application is allowed. The District Magistrate, Ahmedabad is hereby directed to send its opinion to the concerned committee within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court. Let the convict be informed through the concerned jail authority.

¶20

V.R. PANCHAL

¶21

Page 2 of 2

Ravikumar Harishchandraprasad Bhumihar v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravikumar Harishchandraprasad Bhumihar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Allarkha Habibbhai Meman through Amarin Allarkha Meman Vs State of Gujarat

Rajesh @ Banto Kantibhai Rathod Vs State of Gujarat

Jigar @ Kathiyavadi Rameshbhai Patel Thro Parth Babubhai Patel Vs the State of Gujarat

Parsubhai Kaliyabhai Mohaniya through Galkuben Parsubhai Mohaniya Vs State of Gujarat

Malabhai Masabhai Rabari Vs State of Gujarat

Basirmahamad Rasulmiya Shaikh Vs State of Gujarat