Allowed

Amit Shripad Deshpande and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC26 Feb 2008APPLN/168/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order grants bail to two co-accused arrested in a dacoity case. Finding no prima facie evidence that they knew chemicals were obtained via dacoity, the court held they were not liable for life imprisonment offenses and allowed bail on personal bond.

What did the court decide?

The applicants were released on bail on personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount.

Amit Shripad Deshpande and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2008)

¶1

¶2

mpt

¶3

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

¶4

 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 168 of 2008

¶6

 i) Amit Shripad Deshpande & Anr.

¶7

 ii) Anand Krupashankar Mishra .. Applicants
 versus

¶8

 State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶9

 Mr.H.S. Anand i/b Ms.Sarita Donde for the applicants.

¶10

 Mr.D.P.Adsule APP for the State.

¶11

 A N D

¶12

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 175 of 2008

¶13

 i) Hardev Singh Ratipal Singh .. Applicant

¶14

 versus

¶15

 State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶16

 Mr.H.S. Anand i/b Ms.Sarita Donde for the applicants.

¶17

 Mr.D.P.Adsule APP for the State.

¶18

 CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J

¶19

¶20

 DATED : 26th February 2008

¶21

 P.C.:

¶22

 1. These two applications were heard and are
 being disposed of by this common order as they have
 been made by the co-accused in the same crime.

¶23

 2. The applicants were arrested on 24th
 December 2007 in connection with the crime registered
 under C.R. No.205/07 at Daund police station which
 was initially registered u/s.396, 328 and 341 of the
 IPC. Subsequently, offence u/s.411 and 412 was
 added.

¶24

 3. The prosecution case in brief is that 6
 persons (who are not the present applicants) stopped
 a tanker carrying a chemical mono ethylene glycol
 near Basweshwar dhaba at village Mauje Malad, Taluka
 Daund by blocking it’s way by an Indica car. They
 abducted the cleaner and the driver and drove away
 the tanker containing the chemical. The driver was
 subsequently killed and committed dacoity of the
 tanker with the chemical. The chemical in the tanker
 was sold to different persons. Some quantity of
 chemical was allegedly sold to and purchased by the
 present applicants. The applicants are therefore

¶25

¶26

 charged with an offence u/s.412 of the IPC.

¶27

 4. The applicants are in custody since 24th
 December 2007 i.e. for a period of more than two
 months, out of which they were in police custody for
 nearly 10 days. Learned APP was however unable to
 point out any material to show that the applicants
 had purchased the chemicals with the knowledge that
 it was obtained by committing a dacoity. In the
 absence of knowledge, prima facie, offence u/s.412 is
 not made out. At the most, applicants can be charged
 with offence u/s.411 which is punishable with three
 years.

¶28

 5. Taking an overall view of the matter and

¶29

 considering the material available on record, prima
 facie, I am of the view that applicants are not shown
 to be involved in an offence punishable with
 imprisonment for life or any higher offence. In the
 circumstances, applicants are entitled to a bail.
 Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶30

 O R D E R

¶31

 . Each of the applicants shall be released on
 bail on personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two
 sureties of the like amount subject to the condition

¶32

¶33

 that they shall not make any inducements nor give any
 threats to the prosecution witnesses and shall
 co-operate with the investigation and shall attend
 the concerned police station once a week between 5
 p.m. and 7 p.m. on every Monday for a period of
 eight weeks and thereafter once a month between 1st
 and 5th day of British calendar month till the
 conclusion of the trial.

¶34

 . It is clarified that all observations made

¶35

 above are only prima facie and the trial court shall
 not in any way be influenced by them at the time of
 trial.

¶36

 (D.G. KARNIK, J)

Amit Shripad Deshpande and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Shripad Deshpande and Anr. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Raghunath Bhalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Manikrao Mahadev Sasane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajesh @ Rajan Ramniklal Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ansar Ahmed Mohd. Abbas Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhanudas Kondiba Kuchekar Vs Smt. Meera Bhanudas Kuchekar

Jitendra Nandalal Rai Vs the State of Maharashtra