Gujarat High Court
SCR.A/986/1999 of JASHVANTBHAI SHANABHAI RATHOD Vs STATE OF GUJARAT on 10 December 1999
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 986 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 986 of 1999
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE
============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- JASHVANTBHAI SHANABHAI RATHODVersus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: THROUGH JAIL for Petitioner MS SIDHDHI TALATI, APP for Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE
Date of decision: 10/12/1999
ORAL JUDGEMENT
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Reply to this Special Criminal Application is filed which is taken on record.
2. Perused the papers of the Special Criminal Application, reply thereto and heard the learned counsel for the respondents.
3. The petitioner prayed for parole leave for a period of 15 days for the purpose of getting succession certificate. He can apply for succession certificate while in jail. For filing of this case, his release on parole leave is not necessary. Otherwise also, I have my own reservations whether within 30 days he could be able to get succession certificate. These proceedings have to take long time to come to an end. I do not find any justification in this prayer made by the petitioner. It is a fit case where this prayer of the petitioner deserved to be rejected. After filing of petition for succession certificate if the petitioner presence is necessary in court, he can apply for parole leave.
2. In the result, this Special Criminal Application fails and the same is dismissed. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.
�����(S.K.Keshote,J.)
(pathan)