The High Court dismissed bail review applications, upholding bail granted earlier. While noting safety concerns, the Court imposed a direction for the respondents to stay away from a specific village for six months.
The applications were rejected, but the accused were directed not to enter village Gondi for six months.
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.
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
(VITHAL GULABRAO MASKE
V/S
HANUMAN SHRIHARI YEOLE AND ORS) WITH
CRI.APPLN/1972/2010
(VITHAL GULABRAO MASKE
V/S
BABANRAO BHAGURAM YEOLE AND ORS)
Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or
Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s
or directions and Registrar’s orders
Orders
Mr.Joydeep Chatterjee, Adv., for
applicants.
Mr.V.H.Dighe, APP for State.
Mr.A.M.Gaikwad, Adv., for R.nos.
1 to 6 in Cr.Appln.No.1601/2010.
Mr. Shinde, Adv., h/f
Mr. V.D.Salunke, Adv., for
R.Nos. 1 and 2 in Cri.Appln.
No.1972/2010.
...
CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.
DATE: 7/1/2011
1. Heard Mr.Chatterjee and respective Counsel for respondents
inboththeapplications
extensively.Mr.Chatterjee
informs, the controversy relates
to the brothers inter se and
danger to the life is writ large.
The grant of bail by the learned
Sessions Judge has multiplied the
difficulties of the complainant
2
and even other family members. He
has urged to revoke the order of
bail dt.7.4.2007 recorded by the
learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions
Judge, Beed, for the respective
respondentsinMiscellaneous
Criminal Application Nos.194/2010
and 195/2010.
2.On going through the order
under challenge I find, the
learnedSessionsJudgehas
appreciated the facts and is
informed of the individual role
attributed to the respondents
herein. He has even taken care to
ensure that the respondents herein
shall not enter in the village
Gondi, taluka Gevrai, dist.Beed
till filing of the chargesheet.
However, since an apprehension to
the life is expressed and rather
repeatedly harped, the respondents
need to be directed to keep
themselves away from village
Gondi, taluka Gevrai for a period
of six months.
3.Considering the status of the
parties, and as there is no breach
3
of the terms of the bail, I do not
see any reason to entertain the
applications.
4.Theapplicationsare
rejected,however,the
accused/respondentsshallnot
enter village Gondi, for a period
of six months.
(K.U.CHANDIWAL)
JUDGE
AGP/1601-10crapl
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail orders should be revoked given apprehension to life despite compliance with conditions.
Whether respondents should be directed to stay away from the village for an extended period.
VITHAL GULABRAO MASKE
HANUMAN SHRIHARI YEOLE
BABANRAO BHAGURAM YEOLE
K.U.CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court