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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 6263

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 7120 of 2022 ==========================================================

MEHULBHAI RAMJIBHAI PARGHI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

DHRUV TOLIYA(9249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR MANAN MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA Date : 26/07/2022

ORAL ORDER

1. This application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with the FIR being C.R.No. 11208002211582 of 2021 registered at Ajidam Police Station, Rajkot, for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 120, 120B and

114 of IPC and Section 135(1) of the G.P.Act.

2. Heard learned counsel Mr. Dhruv Tolia, for and on behalf of the applicant and learned APP Mr. Manan Mehta, for the State.

3. Brief facts leading to filing of present application are that, the complainant being a wife of deceased Manojbhai, lodged an FIR vide dated 14.11.2021 inter alia alleging that, she received phone call on 28.10.2021 from the police that, dead body of her husband Manojbhai is lying near railway crossing, Kotharia solvent, Rajkot and it seems to be an accident. On receiving the phone call, she immediately went to the civil hospital, Rajkot. She further alleged that, her husband was habitual in consuming liquor and he was unemployed, doing nothing for livelihood. It is alleged that, she took visit the place of accident and upon inquiry nearby the places, she was informed by one unknown person that, he saw one incident before 15 days, wherein, two persons were making altercation and meantime, one person caused fatal injuries by stone upon another person and on the next day, he found the dead body of a person who had received head injuries.

4. In the aforesaid facts, the complainant thought that, her husband was not died due to accident, but he was killed by someone. In such circumstances, a complaint of murder against the unknown persons came to be registered.

During the investigation, it was revealed that, the complainant - wife was in relation with accused No.4 Paresh Parshottam Akbari and they entered into live in relationship and also got divorce from the deceased Manojbhai and thereafter, they again united and decided to live together. The relation with accused No.4 was also continued, despite the complainant living with the deceased.

During the investigation, it was further revealed that, the accused No.4 Paresh Akbari have had criminal conspiracy to kill the deceased Manojbhai for which he contacted accused No.1 Rajesh Parmar, who introduced the accused No.3 Mehul Parghi (present applicant). The contract killing was finalized for a sum of Rs.5,10,000/- and out of the said amount, the accused No.4 paid Rs.75,000/- each to accused No.1 and 3. In order to execute the conspiracy, the accused No.1 met the deceased on 14.11.2021 and deceased was taken to scene of offence where he was brutally killed by accused No.1 causing head injuries using heavy stone.

In the aforesaid facts, in all five accused have been arrested. Investigating ofÏcer seized the necessary samples of stone from place of offence, recovered total amount of Rs.2,96,500/- from the accused, recorded the statements of witnesses, obtained the blood samples of kids of the deceased to determine the DNA profile for forensic analysis and finally chargesheet came to be filed against the accused. The present applicant was arrested on 17.11.2021. He moved an application for regular bail before the Sessions Court, Rajkot, which came to be rejected vide order dated 28.02.2022.

5. Mr. Tolia, learned counsel for the applicant urged the following contentions :-

(I) It was submitted that, the applicant has been apprehended on the basis of statement of co-accused and as such there is no incriminating material found to link the accused herein to indicate that he was part of criminal conspiracy allegedly hatched by the accused No.4. It was submitted that, so far role of the applicant is concerned, he advised that to eliminate the deceased, it is necessary that deceased must have given more liquor for his consumption. It is in this context, it was submitted that, nothing on record to show that, such kind of advise being given by the applicant, as a part of criminal conspiracy hatched by accused No.4.

(ii) On the aspect of recover

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top