SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 331

2004(2) Supreme 493
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Gujarat High Court)
S. Rajendra Babu, Arun Kumar & G.P. Mathur, JJ.
Moulvi Hussain Ibrahim Umarji -Petitioner
versus
State of Gujarat -Respondent
Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 4773 of 2003
Decided on 17-3-2004
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Petitioner : Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Advocate, A. Haisan, Yakub, Ms. Inklee Barooah, Ms. Shomila Bakshi, Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Advocates.
For the Respondent : Sushil Kumar, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Advocate.

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 439-Bail-Godhra Railway Station case where coach was set on fire resulting in death of 59 persons and serious injuries to 48 others-Offences u/s 143, 147, 148, 332, 337, 338, 435, 186, 120B, 153(a), 302, 307, 395 and 397 IPC and u/s 3(2) and 3(3) of POTA etc. were registered-Appellant-Accused was arrested on 6.2.2003-In view of limited scope of examination of the matter at stage of bail on prima facie view, various aspects of merits of case was not required to be considered-Petitioners case found not to be a fit case for grant of bail. (Para 2)

       

JUDGMENT

G.P. Mathur, J.-An incident took place at about 7.45 a.m. on 27.2.2002 when the Sabarmati Express was stopped near Godhra Railway Station and a coach was set on fire resulting in death of 59 persons and serious injuries to 48 others. The petitioner herein was arrested in connection with the said offence on 6.2.2003 and is charged for committing offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 332, 337, 338, 435, 186, 120(b), 153(a), 302, 307, 395, 397 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2) and Section 3(3) of the POTA, and Sections 141, 151 and 152 of the Indian Railways Act, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act. He moved an application for being enlarged on bail, which was rejected by the learned Special Judge (POTA) on 7.7.2003 and the appeal preferred by him against the said order was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court on 2.8.2003. The present Special Leave Petition has been preferred challenging the aforesaid orders.

2. We have heard Shri Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Shri Sushil Kumar, learned senior counsel for the respondent State of Gujarat at considerable length and have perused the record. We do not wish to consider in detail the various aspects of the merits of the case put forth on behalf of parties but bearing in mind the limited scope of the examination of the matter at the stage of grant or refusal of bail on the prima facie view, we are of the opinion that this is not a fit case where the petitioner may be released on bail. The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

********************

 

00020

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top