CR.A/1823/2008 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1823 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLAKIA : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DN PATEL : ======================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ======================================================= MOHD. TARIK FARIDBHAI SHAIKH - Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Opponent(s) ======================================================= Appearance : MR KHALID G SHAIKH for Appellant(s) : 1, MR EJAZ M QURESHI for Appellant(s) : 1, MR JM PANCHAL SPL. PP for Opponent(s) : 1, ======================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLAKIA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DN PATEL Date : 24/09/2008 CR.A/1823/2008 2/5 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLAKIA) 1. The present Criminal Appeal being successive bail application under Section 34 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act has been preferred by the appellant- original accused viz., Mohd. Tarif Faridbhai Shaikh for releasing him on regular bail in connection with DCB Crime Police Station, Ahmedabad I-C.R.No.6/2003 (POTA Case No.6/2003), wherein the present appellant was arrested on 18.04.2003 and sent to judicial custody on 30.04.2003. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the records. 3. It has been mainly argued by the learned counsel for the appellant, Mr.K.G. Shaikh that the present appellant is totally innocent and has been falsely involved in the crime in question. It is also argued that though specific direction has been given by the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Court, the trial has not been completed by the Court below within stipulated period and yet the trial will take its own course. It is also argued that the witnesses examined by the prosecution have not supported the say of the prosecution and no incrementing evidence has come on record against CR.A/1823/2008 3/5 JUDGMENT the present appellant. It is, therefore, requested that the appellant may be released on bail. 4. Learned Special P.P., Mr.Panchal has drawn our attention that here in this case, the prosecution has already examined about 168 witnesses and now approximately 25-30 witnesses are to be examined and the Court is also taking care to deal with the matter as early as possible, for which, the concerned Judge is visiting and conducting the trial in the Central Jail itself and, hence, the trial will be completed as early as possible. Mr.Panchal has also drawn our attention towards applications filed by the present appellant before the trial court namely Criminal Misc. Application No.47/2004 and Criminal Misc. Application No.1354/2007. It is also argued by Mr.Panchal that it is a serious offence and the role of the present appellant has been fully established to connect him with the crime in question. It is, therefore, submitted that looking to the seriousness of the offence, the bail is required to be rejected. 5. We have taken into consideration the oral as well as documentary evidence shown to us by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties along with the reasoned judgment delivered by the Court CR.A/1823/2008 4/5 JUDGMENT below in Criminal Misc. Application No.1845/2008, which shows that here in this case, the prosecution has already examined more than 168 witnesses and as stated by Learned Spl. P.P., Mr.Panchal, now only 25-30 witnesses are to be examined and they are Police Officers. We have also gone through the evidence on record and found that there is prima- facie case to connect the accused with the crime in question. Record also shows that the Learned Special Court is dealing with the matter on a day- to-day basis by allotting three days in a week, for that, the Judge is regularly going into Central Jail from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., wherein Court has been created there itself. It is required to be noted that most of the witnesses are the Police Officers and they are easily available and, therefore, the trial will be completed in near future. It is required to be noted that other co- accused have also filed various application before this Court, which we have finally disposed of. We have also gone through the impugned judgment delivered by the Court below, wherein the trial Court has dealt with in detail the role played by the appellant especially in paragraph no.6 and, therefore, we are not repeating the same. CR.A/1823/2008 5/5 JUDGMENT 6. In view of the seriousness of the offence and this being successive bail application and in view of the fact that the trial is going on on a day-to-day basis, this Criminal Appeal for bail is required to be rejected and is rejected accordingly. Notice is discharged. (R.P.DHOLAKIA, J.) (D.N. PATEL, J.) /patil