JEHAN ZAHIRBHAI SANDHI (MANIYAR) v. STATE OF GUJARAT
Court: High Court of Gujarat
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Gujarat judgment dated 2024-02-16. JEHAN ZAHIRBHAI SANDHI (MANIYAR) v. STATE OF GUJARAT. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE ANTICIPATORY BAIL - AFTER CHARGE-SHEET) NO. 22848 of 2023 ========================================= JEHAN ZAHIRBHAI SANDHI (MANIYAR) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================= Appearance : MR MD. MOHSIN M SHAIKH for the Applicant. MS MAITHILI MEHTA, APP for the Respondent. ========================================= CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 16/02/2024 ORAL ORDER 1. By way of this successive bail application, the applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with FIR bearing C. R. No. 11191018230779 of 2023 registered with Gomtipur Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 65(A), 65(E), 81 and 83 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act. 2. It is the case of the applicant that he is only 20 years old boy who has been forcibly implicated in respect of the offence in question.
However, considering the fact that the present applicant had earlier preferred an application for anticipatory bail being Criminal Misc. Application No. 13971 of 2023 which was withdrawn by learned advocate appearing for the applicant vide order dated 17. 8. 2023, the present successive application is preferred for anticipatory bail. 3. Upon specific query to learned advocate Mr. Shaikh that what is the change of circumstances for preferring successive bail application, learned advocate Mr. Shaikh clearly conceded that as such, there are no change of circumstances. 4. In absence of there being any change of circumstances, learned APP Ms. Maithili Mehta vehemently opposed the present application for anticipatory bail by stating that it is a settled law that unless there is change of circumstances, successive application for anticipatory bail cannot be considered. 5.
In view of undisputed fact that this is a successive bail application seeking anticipatory bail and considering the fact that there are no change of circumstances as admitted by learned advocate Mr. Shaikh for the applicant, the present application cannot be considered and, therefore, the same is required to be dismissed and the same is dismissed accordingly. Rule is discharged. (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) SAVARIYA
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.