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

2025 Supreme(GUJ) 206

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
DINESH KANTILAL MENSARA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

ORDER :

HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of him arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11191037241461 /2024 registered with registered with Odhav Police Station, Ahmedabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 238, 54 and 85 of the BNS.

3. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and she is falsely enroped in the offence and the allegations against the present applicant is that he is aware of the alleged offence. Though, he has destroyed the evidence and abetted the offence, except this, there is no any allegations qua direct instigation or involvement of the applicant, but, perusing the afÏdavit, Column No. 31, it appears that the allegations are against only accused Nos.1 to 3. Applicant is also not named in the FIR. It is submitted that applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation. Now nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant and

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top