Allowed

Shailesh Chimanlal Bhatt v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Jan 2011APPA/43/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted temporary bail to the applicant pending criminal appeal, allowing him outside prison during family religious ceremonies and his niece's marriage, subject to specific reporting and travel conditions.

What did the court decide?

Temporary bail granted from 20.01.2011 to 27.01.2011 (inclusive) subject to bond of Rs. 25,000, sureties, reporting to police, and restrictions on travel.

Shailesh Chimanlal Bhatt Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

1 appa4311

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 43 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1020 OF 2009

¶5

Shailesh Chimanlal Bhatt ...Applicant

¶6

V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶8

None for the Applicant

¶9

Ms. P.H. Kantharia, Special Public Prosecutor for CBI

¶10

Mr. K.V. Saste, A.P.P., for the State.

¶11

CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATE: 19TH JANUARY, 2011

¶12

P.C.:-

¶13

This application is received through jail.

¶14

By this application, the applicant prays for temporary bail

¶15

during the pendency of appeal in this Court, on the ground that his niece is getting married, and there are other religious ceremonies in the family between 22nd January, 2011 till 25th of January, 2011. The applicant is

¶16

2 appa4311

¶17

presently in Vadodara Central Prison, undergoing sentence in connection with offences, being Sessions Case No. 634 of 2004 tried by the Special Judge, Mumbai.

¶18

The learned Special Public Prosecutor, on instructions of Mr. Pramod Mudbhattal, Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., S.C.B., Mumbai, states that, considering the background of the present applicant, and the fact that there are some religious ceremonies in the family of the applicant between 22nd January, 2011 till 25th of January, 2011, including marriage of his niece, which fact has been ascertained by the concerned officer of the C.B.I., the applicant be released on temporary bail for a limited period between 20th January, 2011 till 27th January, 2011 (both days inclusive). In other words, the applicant be released on bail on 20th January, 2011 before 4.00 p.m., and he shall report back to jail before 12.00 noon on 27th January, 2011.

¶19

This bail is granted on the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant is released on bail in connection with the above offences on executing bond in the

¶21

3 appa4311

¶22

sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the

¶23

like amount.

¶24

(ii) The applicant shall report to Mehamadabad City Police Station on all days during the relevant period between 9 a.m. to 10.30 a.m., except on 24th January, 2011.

¶25

(iii) The applicant shall furnish his latest residential address to the local police station and shall not travel outside Mehamadabad without prior intimation of 48 hours in writing to the local police station and also disclose his travel programme and the contact place where he would visit.

¶26

Application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶27

The learned Special Public Prosecutor shall communicate this order to the Superintendent of Vadodara Central Prison forthwith on Fax / e-mail. In addition, office to forthwith communicate this order to

¶28

the applicant, who is in jail, on Fax / e-mail.

¶29

4 appa4311

¶30

All concerned to act on a copy of this order duly

¶31

authenticated by the Sheristedar.

¶32

A.R. JOSHI, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.

Shailesh Chimanlal Bhatt v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh Chimanlal Bhatt v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tulsidas Nair and Anr. Vs Chairman, the Human Rights Commissioner New Delhi and Anr.

Onkar G. Ganvir Vs State through Cbi, Acb, Mumbai

Susheela Rao Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

S. Shiva Gopinath and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ronald Rodriques and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Umaima K. Chitalwala Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.