Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1155 (GUJ)

Chandubhai Ratabhai Dabhi v. State of Gujarat

2017-07-03

A.J.SHASTRI, ABHILASHA KUMARI

body2017
ORDER : ABHILASHA KUMARI, J. Rule. Mr. J.K Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule for the respondents. 2. This application dated 14.06.2017 has been preferred by the applicant through Jail, with a prayer to enlarge him on temporary bail for a period of forty-five days in order to carry on agricultural activities for the monsoon season. 3. We have perused the averments made in the application as well as the Jail record appended to the application which indicate that on the previous occasions when the applicant was released on bail, he has surrendered on time. However, the Jail Authorities have, it seems, forgotten to give any remark regarding the conduct of the applicant. It further appears from the Jail record that the applicant was last released on Furlough with effect from 10.03.2017 to 23.03.2017 4. We have noticed that the application is accompanied by a certificate dated 31.05.2017, issued by Dabhi Chandubhai Ambalal, Member of Taluka Panchayat, Kathlal, District Kheda, wherein it has been categorically recommended to this Court that if the applicant is released on temporary bail, he would be helpful to his family. 5. Shri Chandubhai Ambalal Dabhi, Member of Taluka Panchayat, Kathlal, District Kheda, is present in the Court today. He has stated that the certificate has been written and signed by him and that he has made a mistake. 6. Time and again we have deprecated the practice of elected representatives of issuing such certificates, which are recommendatory in nature, given with the intention of trying to influence the discretion of the Court. We consider this practice, or rather malpractice, to be a direct interference in the judicial function of the Court. Further, the issuance of such certificates hints at the possibility of a nexus between criminal elements and elected representatives, who may hail from the same village. 7. We are not inclined to grant temporary bail to the applicant, who has tried to influence our discretion by procuring the certificate annexed to this application. 8. We, however, consider it necessary to state that the duty of a Member of the Taluka Panchayat does not include the indiscriminate issuance of recommendatory certificates, the purpose of which is to release the convict on temporary bail, knowing fully well that the certificate would be produced before the Court. 9. 8. We, however, consider it necessary to state that the duty of a Member of the Taluka Panchayat does not include the indiscriminate issuance of recommendatory certificates, the purpose of which is to release the convict on temporary bail, knowing fully well that the certificate would be produced before the Court. 9. A perusal of the certificate further indicates that the Member of Kathlal Taluka Panchyat has not verified the revenue record, as the name of the applicant does not figure in the record that has been annexed in the present application; whereas in the certificate it is stated that the applicant owns agricultural land. There is no outward number or reference number in the certificate which further indicates that it does not appear to be a part of the official record of Taluka Panchayat, Kathlal. 10. The issuance of certificates such as the one annexed to the application leaves the door open for malpractices and, may be corrupt practices to flourish. We, therefore, consider it appropriate to bring this practice to the notice of the Principal Secretary, Panchayat Department, so that such tendencies to attempt interference in the judicial functions of the Court by elected representatives, are curbed once and for all. 11. The application stands rejected. Rule is discharged.