High Court dismissed the bail application for three accused persons. The court held that evidence, including specific witness statements and recovery, supported the trial court's finding of involvement, making the refusal of bail a possible view.
Bail application failed for accused Nos. 1, 3, and 7.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
appa.294.10.sxw
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.294 OF 2010 IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.818 OF 2008
Anwar Musa Sayyed & Ors. ...Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr.Ashok Mundargi, Sr.Counsel with Ms.Vishranti Navale for Applicants.
Mr.J.P.Yagnik, A.P.P. for Respondent.
CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND U.D.SALVI, JJ. DATED:- SEPTEMBER 17, 2010.
P.C.
Counsel appearing for the Applicants, in all fairness, submits that insofar as accused No.1 is concerned, he may not press this Application, as there is consistent evidence about his overt act and involvement in the commission of offence.
appa.294.10.sxw
2
recorded before the Police. That fact is established from the crossexamination of the said witnesses, where they have accepted that position. The fact remains that PW 2 has mentioned the involvement of accused Nos. 3 and 7 specifically in Section 164 statement. The fact that PW 1 and PW 4 have not mentioned the name of accused Nos.3 and 7 in the Police Statement, does not take the matter any further. There are strong circumstances on record which have been adverted to by the Trial Court indicating the involvement of accused Nos.3 and 7 including the recovery of gupti . For the purpose of bail, we think that the view taken by the lower Court is a possible view. Hence, this Application should fail in respect of all the three accused namely accused Nos.1, 3 and 7.
(U.D.SALVI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to accused Nos. 3 and 7 given lack of naming in initial witness statements but evidence of recovery and specific 164 statement involvement.
Anwar Musa Sayyed & Ors.
The State of Maharashtra
A.M.KHANWILKAR
U.D.SALVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
