HASMUKHBHAI KURJIBHAI BHALSOD Vs. THE JAIL SUPERINTENDENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Maulik Nanavati, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr.Pranav Trivedi, learned APP for the opponent State. Rule. Mr.Trivedi, learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of opponent - State. Mr.Maulik Nanavati, learned advocate submitted that inadvertently in the present application, the applicant is shown in the jail of District Jail, Jamnagar, however, at present the present applicant is in Rajkot Central Jail. He, therefore, seeks amendment accordingly. Amendment is granted.

(2.) The present application has been filed by the applicant - convict for temporary bail on the ground that his wife is suffering from cancer and, therefore his presence is required as particularly there is no other person in his family who can take the wife of the applicant to the hospital. Mr.Nanavati, learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is convicted for offence under Section 376 of the IPC, and as the main appeal may take its own time for the disposal, but he has all the expectation that appeal may be allowed because the victim herself turned hostile, the DNA report of the child is not matched with the DNA of the present applicant and the conviction is mainly based upon the history given by the victim before the Medical Officer. He has also submitted that the wife of the applicant is suffering from cancer and, therefore, treatment is required. He assures that the applicant will surrender in time after the completion of temporary bail period.

(3.) Learned APP Mr.Trivedi for the opponent State has made the submission that it is recent conviction and during the period of trial the applicant was on bail and he has undergone only 8 months conviction in the jail. He further submitted that police report describes that the wife of the applicant is suffering from cancer but at the same time substantive treatment is over and therefore it is submitted that there is no need to release the applicant on temporary bail.