LexIZHARUL HAQ ABDUL HAMID SHAIKH & ANR. versus STATE OF GUJARAT
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
-
[2009] 4 S.C.R. 1
IZHARUL HAQ ABDUL HAMID SHAIKH & ANR.
V.
STATE OF GUJARAT
Criminal Appeal No.811 of 2008
MARCH 6, 2009
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA,
JJ.]
Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987
A
B
""
- s.20(8), 20-A - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973- s. :39 -
Bail - Appellant, one of the labourer employed for loading C
and unloading of boxes - Other labourers granted bail -
Designated Court rejected the bail application on the
presumption that he had knowledge of contents of the boxes
- On appeal, held: No material to presume that appellant had
knowledge of contents of boxes - He may be granted bail on D
-.
parity with other labourers - Moreover, before recording FIR,
approval under s.20-A (1) of TADA Act not obtained - Bail
granted to the second appellant a/so.
Shaheen Welfare Association v. Union of India & Ors.
(1996) 2 SCC 616; Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994) 3 E
SCC 569; Supreme Court
Legal
Aid
Committee
Representing Undertria/ Prisoners vs. Union of India & Ors.
-t
(1994) 6 SCC 731; Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma vs.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. (2005) 5 SCC 294; State of
Maharashtra vs. Bharat Shanti Lal Shah & Ors. 2008 (12)
F
SCALE 167; Mukhtiar Ahmed Ansari vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
(2005) 5 sec 258 - referred to
Case Law Reference
(1996) 2 sec 616
(1994) 3 sec 569
(1994) 6 sec 731
referred to
referred to
referred to
1
Para 10
Para 11
Para 12
G
H
2
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
A
(2005) 5 sec 294
referred to
(2008) 12 SCALE 167 referred to
(2005) 5 sec 258
referred to
[2009] 4 S.C.R.
Para 15
Para 16
Para 21
B
CRIMINALAPPELLATEJURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal
No. 811 of 2008
From the Judgement and Order dated 09.04.2008 of the
Hon'ble Designated TADA Court at Valsad, Gujrat in Criminal
Misc. Application No. 68 of 2008 in Special TADA Case No. 1
~
c of 2005.
D
WITH
Criminal Appeal No. 813 of 2008
Criminai Appeal No. 453 of 2009
@ Criminal Appeal D.No. 23837 of 2008
Rajeev Sharma, for the Appellants.
Hemantika Wahi, for the Respondent.
E
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by
F
ALTAMAS KABIR, J.
1. Delay condoned in Criminal Appeal D.No.23837 of
2008.
These three criminal appeals have been taken up together
as the same questions of law relating to the Terrorists and
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred
to as 'TADA') regarding grant of bail are involved. All these three
appeals have been filed under Section 19 of TADA relating to
G separate incidents which are alleged to have occurred in
Porbandar and Valsad in the State of Gujarat.
2. Criminal Appeal No.811 of2008 has been filed by lzharul
Haq Abdul Hamid Shaikh and Amir Gu lam Husein Bandukwala
H against the order passed by the Designated Court, Porbandar,
..
IZHARUL HAQ ABDUL HAMID SHAIKH & ANR. V.
3
STATE OF GUJARAT [ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]
'.\
on 15th February, 2008 in Criminal Misc. Application No.164 of A
2007 in Special TADA Case No.6 of 2005 in respect of offences
alleged to have been committed under Sections 121, 121A,
122, 123. 120B, 34 IPC, Section 25(1)AB,AAoftheArmsAct,
Section 9-8 of the Explosive Substances Act read with Sections
3, 4, 5 and 6 of TADA.
B
3. The appellant No.1, lzharul Haq Abdul Hamid Shaikh
has also filed Criminal Appeal D.No.23837 of 2008 against order
dated 9
1
h April, 2008, passed by the Designated TADA Court at
Valsad in Criminal Misc. Application No.68 of 2008 in Special
TADA Case No.1 of 2005 in respect of charges similar to those c
made against him in the Porbandar case.
4. Criminal Appeal No.813 of 2008 has been filed by one
Jivan Raghu Varli against an order dated 13th September, 2007,
in Criminal Misc. Application No.88 of 2007 on charges similar D
i·
to those made against lzharul Haq Abdul Hamid Shaikh.
5. In all the three appeal.s, the prayer for bail made on behalf
of the appellants under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and Section 20{8)
of TADA has been rejected.
6. Mr. Sushi! Kumar, learned Senior Advocate, appearing E
for the appellants in Crl. Appeal No.811 of 2008 and Crl. Appeal
D. No.23837 of 2008, submitted that lzharul Haq Abdul Hamid
+
Shaikh has been in custody since his arrest on 29th April, 2005,
i.e. for more than 3Yi years while the minimum sentence provided
F
in the TADA is 5 years and the maximum is life sentence. He
urged that if the appellant was ultimately convicted and given
minimum sentence, he would have completed suchExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.