DINESH KANTILAL THAKKAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Soeb R Bhoaharia, learned advocate states that he has received instructions to appear for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 and sought permission to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2. Permission; as sought for; stands granted. He shall file his Vakalatnama before the Registry. Registry shall accept the same.

(2.) By way of present application, the applicant has requested to quash and set aside the order dated dtd. 29/4/2022 passed by learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhachau in Criminal Misc. Application No. 32 of 2022 and order dtd. 14/12/2022 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhachau in Criminal Misc. Application No. 575 of 2022 and enlarge the applicant on regular bail in connection with FIR being CR No. I-27 of 2018 registered with Rapar Police Station, District Kutch East Gandhidham for the offence punishable under Ss. 302 , 307 , 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

(3.) Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. It was submitted by learned advocate for the applicant that in connection with FIR being CR No. I-27 of 2018 registered with Rapar Police Station, District Kutch East Gandhidham for the offence punishable under Ss. 302 , 307 , 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, the applicant was arrested and thereafter, he was released on regular bail by this court vide order dtd. 8/1/2019 in Criminal Misc. Application No. 22478 of 2018 and thereafter, the complainant preferred an application before the court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant by preferring CRMA No. 32 of 2022 and such application was allowed by cancelling the bail of the applicant and as against that, the applicant approached this court by way of Special Criminal Application No. 5407 of 2022 wherein the same was withdrawn vide order dtd. 25/8/2022 with a liberty to file a fresh application before the High court of Gujarat if the trial is not commenced within three months. Thereafter, the applicant approached the learned Sessions court by way of CrMA No. 575 of 2022 requesting to release him on regular bail but the same was rejected vide order dtd. 14/12/2022. The ground under which the bail of the applicant was rejected about issuance of threat by the applicant to the advocate with prosecution to kill him but the said story has been created with an intention to harass the applicant and thus, it was ultimately requested by learned advocate for the applicant to allow present application.