Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
PT
PARTHIJI MAFAJI THAKOR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
(PRANAV TRIVEDI, J.)
ORDER IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION:
Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for the respondent – State.
ORDER IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (REGULAR BAIL) NO. 3 OF 2024:
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for the respondent – State.
2. By way of present application, the applicant – accused is praying to release him on regular bail during pendency of the present revision application preferred against the judgment and order of conviction dated 13.12.2021 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deesa in Criminal Case No. 576 of 2008, which came to be confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deesa vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.1.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2021, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deesa has sentenced the applicant to undergo simple imprisonment of 7 years under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo further simple imprisonment of 6 months.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the Criminal Revision Application is of the year 2024 and it will take some time to h
Bail granted based on time served and nature of injuries, with conditions to ensure compliance with law.
The court emphasized that a conviction in a criminal case must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, not merely on preponderance of probabilities.
The court held that the failure of the complainant to prove a legally enforceable debt justified the suspension of the applicant's sentence pending revision.
The court may grant bail after considering the gravity of the offense, the applicant's history of absconding, and the conditions necessary to ensure trial attendance.
The court ruled that prolonged incarceration without trial progress warrants bail, emphasizing the importance of timely justice.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; if evidence is insufficient, the benefit of doubt favors the accused.
The court ruled that bail may be granted considering the nature of allegations, the applicant's role in the offense, and the absence of direct fatal involvement.
The conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act was erroneous as the complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt, warranting interim relief for the applicants.
The court established that bail may be granted when continued detention is unjustified, considering the nature of allegations and evidence presented.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
