Allowed

Smadhan Krishna Patil and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC30 Aug 2010APPLN/2228/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court released applicants charged with rioting, arson, and injuring police/doctors on bail conditioned upon furnishing bonds, providing sureties, non-interference with witnesses, and depositing compensation sums in the Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Relieved on bail subject to furnishing PR bonds, providing sureties, not tampering with witnesses, not entering the hospital premises, and depositing Rs.15,000 each in the Trial Court within four week

Smadhan Krishna Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2010)

APPLN 2451OF10.sxw

vks

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2228 OF 2010

¶6

Samadhan Krishna Patil and ors. .. Applicants

¶7

-versus The State of Maharashtra

¶8

.. Respondent.

¶9

WITH

¶10

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2389 OF 2010

¶11

Jayesh Pandurang Mhatre .. Applicant

¶12

versus

¶13

The State of Maharashtra.

¶14

WITH

¶15

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2451 OF 2010.

¶16

Kalpesh P Patil .. Applicant -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent.

¶17

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2371 OF 2010

¶18

Alankat Janardan Bhoir .. Applicant

¶19

versus The State of Maharashtra

¶20

.. Respondent.

¶21

Mr. A. P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel, for the applicants in all the applications.

¶22

Mr. B.G.Tangsali, for the applicant in Application No.2228 of 2010

¶23

APPLN 2451OF10.sxw

¶24

¶25

and 2389 of 2010 and 2451 of 2010.

¶26

Mr. S.V.Gavand, for applicant in Application No.2371 of 20110.

¶27

Mrs. Geeta Mulekar, APP for the State in Application No.2451 of 2010.

¶28

Mrs. S.D.Shinde, APP for the State in Application Nos 2228/10, and application No.2371 of 2010 and Application No.2389 of 2010.

¶29

CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 30^th August, 2010

¶30

P.C.

¶31

The applicants in these applications have been arrested on 25^th January,2010 for rioting and causing grievous injuries to the Police Officer as well as Doctors .

¶32

Applicant Samadhan Krishna Patil’s relative Samadhan Pruthviraj Patil, died while taking treatment in the hospital of Astha Hospital, Pen of Dr.Palvia. A mob comprising all the applicants and several others, attacked the hospital and did not pay any heed to the intervention of the police personnel. The police were also injured. The hospital was set on fire causing a loss of over Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. All the applicants have been arrested and they are in jail since 25.l.2010. The learned counsel for the applicants State that other accused who participated in the riot and were similarly placed and have been admitted to bail by various orders and stated that the present applicants may be admitted to bail.

¶33

The leaned Additional Public Prosecutor points out that

¶34

3 APPLN 2451OF10.sxw

¶35

the applicants have indulged in rioting and have caused grievous injuries to police officers on duty and have specific roles in the entire incident and therefore, they cannot be admitted to bail. She further points that the Prevention of Violence against Medicare Service Institution Act, provides for not only punishment to the offenders, but also recovery of compensation from the offenders which can go to the extent of double the amount of loss caused.

¶36

The learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicants are in jail since 8 months. The applicant Nos l, 9, l3 and l7 in Criminal Application No.2228 of 2010, are the students. The applicant No.7 has no occupation. The application Nos 2,6,8, and 11 were contractor labourers, but have lost their job upon their arrest and therefore, states that they have been in jail for sufficiently long time. He submits that applicants were picked up from the spot and applicants’ role to the entire incident is yet to be established.

¶37

Even so without prejudice to their contesting the prosecution case on merits, he submits that his client as a good gesture are willing to deposit Rs.l5,000/- each which may be ultimately appropriated by the trial Court as per result of the trial. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the all the applications are allowed on the following conditions.

APPLN 2451OF10.sxw

ORDER

I) The applicants in above applications be released on bail on their furnishing PR bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sums of Rs.25,000/- each.

¶42

II) They shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and they shall not enter into the premises of the hospital.

¶43

III) As agreed they shall deposit a sum of Rs.l5,000/each without prejudice to the rights of the parties, in the Trial Court, within a period of four weeks, failing which the bail granted to them would be liable to be cancelled.

¶44

IV)All the applications stand disposed of.

¶45

(R. C. CHAVAN, J.)

Smadhan Krishna Patil and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smadhan Krishna Patil and Ors. 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

Smt. Sonabai Baburao Padwal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pravin Ramesh Kokare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dhananjay Pandurang Farne Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arjun Sidram Salgar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Raju Laxman Gavali Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sachin @ Aditya Janadan Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra