STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. ROSHANAARA GULAMMURTAZA MOLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present petition under Sec. 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner State has prayed to quash and set aside the order dtd. 25/2/2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc. Application No.1309 of 2019, whereby the learned Session Judge has granted bail to the respondent ' original accused.

(2.) Heard learned APP for the petitioner State. Learned APP would submit that the learned Sessions Court has granted bail t the accused without assigning any cogent and valid reasons and without appreciating the evidence on record and therefore, the impugned order is a non-speaking order. She would further submit that not only the respondent accused has played active role, but also facilitated other main accused in commission of the offence. She would further submit that the name of the respondent was specifically mentioned by the complainant at the time of lodgment of the complaint and that the accused has played active role in commission of the offence. Therefore, considering the seriousness of the nature of the offence and the role played by the respondent accused, learned APP submits to allow this petition.

(3.) In Bhagirathsinh S/O Mahipat Singh . vs State Of Gujarat [AIR 1984 SC 372], the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order seeking cancellation of the bail. In paragraph 8 it has been observed thus: