Allowed

Ramesh Manikraj Singh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Apr 2005APPLN/1577/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Application seeking anticipatory bail in connection with offences under IPC and special laws. Court allowed bail on conditions of personal bond, tampering prohibition, and reporting when called by police.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with personal bond of Rs. 25,000, sureties, prohibition on influencing witnesses, and undertaking to report when summoned by police.

Ramesh Manikraj Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

 - 1 -

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1577 OF 2005

¶5

 Ramesh Manikraj Singh ...Applicant
 v/s.

¶6

 The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶7

 Mr.Amin Solkar for the Applicant.

¶8

 Mr.K.V.Saste, APP for the State.

¶9

CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.

¶10

DATED:4TH APRIL,2005

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

 - 2 -

¶13

 1. Heard counsel for the parties. The Applicant
 apprehends arrest in connection with offence
 registered as C.R.No.37 of 2004 with Kagal Police
 Station, Kolhapur for the offence punishable under
 Section 285 of IPC and under Sections 3 & 7 of the
 Essential Commodities Act and Sections 3 & 4 of
 Petroleum Products Act. During the pendency of this
 Application, the Applicant was directed to report to
 the concerned police station by orders dated 9th
 March, 2005 and 21st March, 2005. Affidavit of
 Jayant Kondiba Dhamal, Assistant Police Inspector
 attached to Kagal Police Station sworn on 28th March,
 2005 was filed stating that the Applicant has not
 complied with the directions passed by this Court.

¶14

 2. This fact was controverted by the Applicant by
 filing an affidavit sworn on 28th March, 2005 giving
 details that the Applicant has visited the concerned
 police station on particular dates and that he was
 asked to leave without interrogation. In my order
 dated 28th March, 2005, I had observed that the
 correctness of the stand of the rival parties will be
 examined at the time of passing final order on this
 application.

¶15

 - 3 -

¶16

 3. Today, the learned APP submits that the Applicant
 has reported to the concerned police station in terms
 of the directions passed in order dated 28th March,
 2005 and has Co.operated in all respect. This
 statement is made on instructions of Mr.A.G.Gondhali,
 Head Constable.

¶17

 4. Taking overall view of the matter, I have no
 reason to doubt the correctness of the statement made
 by the Applicant, for a simple reason that no prudent
 person who has been named as accused in the criminal
 case will take the risk of not complying with the
 directions given by the Court, as condition for
 granting interim protection in the anticipatory bail
 application filed by him. Moreover, the affidavit
 filed by the Applicant is very specific and clear.

¶18

 5. The learned APP submits that the Applicant has
 been fully interrogated and the custodial
 interrogation is no more necessary. All the relevant
 record has been seized by the police during the
 course of investigation. The learned APP, therefore,
 submits that the Applicant be granted anticipatory
 bail on condition that he shall make him available as
 and when required by the concerned police station.

¶19

 - 4 -

¶20

 Accordingly, this application is allowed on the
 following conditions:

¶21

 (i) The Applicant is granted anticipatory bail in
 connection with C.R. No.37 of 2004 registered with
 Kagal Police Station on executing personal bond in
 the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twentyfive thousand)
 with two local sureties in the like amount.

¶22

 (ii) The Applicant shall not influence the
 prosecution witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence
 in any manner whatsoever.

¶23

 (iii) The Applicant shall report to the concerned
 police station as and when called upon for the
 purpose of investigation of the present case.

¶24

 (iv) This order will enure in favour of the Applicant
 till the filing of the charge-sheet.

Ramesh Manikraj Singh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Manikraj Singh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mansoor Rashid Sayed Vs Whida Mansoor Sayed and Anr.

Yashwant Keshavrao Mulik Vs the State of Maharashtra

Paranna Madiwalappa Bhinge Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sikandar Manu Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra

Navnath Eknath Jaigude Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahadev Manikrao Giri Vs the State of Maharashtra