Gujarat High Court
SCR.A/236/2000 of ATILABHAI JANABHAI GAMIT Vs STATE OF GUJARAT on 5 December 2000
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 236 of 2000 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 236 of 2000
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
-------------------------------------------------------------- ATILABHAI JANABHAI GAMIT
Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MS SNEHA P VAIDYA for Petitioner MS HANSA B PUNANI, APP, for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED for Respondent No. 2
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE
Date of decision: 05/12/2000
ORAL JUDGEMENT
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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. Dispute is there between the learned counsel for the parties on the release of the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. states that the petitioner has been released whereas the learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has been released on temporary bail. Be that as it may.
2. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shahada Khatoon and Ors. vs. Amjad Ali & Ors. reported in 1999 (5) SCC 672 for non-compliance with the order of the Magistrate passed under section 125 of Cr. P.C., the maximum sentence could have been imposed of one month. Here, the sentence exceeding one month has been imposed. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner has already undergone sentence of one month. If it is correct then the petitioner be released forthwith if he is in jail or if he is not in jail and on bail then he is free from bail bond, surety. Rule is made absolute.
**********
zgs/-