Partly allowed

Ajay Alias Kaka Sudhir Jagdale and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC20 Jun 2011BA/671/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a bail application. While noting conflicting affidavits from injured parties and that firearms were used, the Court distinguished applicants based on whether they were alleged users or were already in custody for similar offenses.

What did the court decide?

Application tried separately on its very merits for the first two applicants is rejected. Trial is granted for the rest.

Ajay Alias Kaka Sudhir Jagdale and Ors. Vs the State of… — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2011)

BA-671-11==.sxw

Dixit

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.671 OF 2011

¶6

Ajay @ Kaka Sudhir Jagdale & Ors. ... Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Shirur Police Station, Pune ... Respondent

¶7

Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Sr. Advocate, i/b. Mr. P.R. Yadav, with Mr. Dilip Shukla for the Applicants. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP, for the Respondent. Mr. Shashi P. for the First Informant.

¶8

CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 20TH JUNE, 2011.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

Heard at length.

¶11

It is submitted that the injured persons in this case and the Applicants had some disputes between them in the past and that now they have decided to forget these disputes and differences and to start living peacefully in the village. The affidavits filed by the injured persons, (five in number), are tendered by Mr. Mundargi, the learned Counsel, which are taken on record. Copies of these affidavits have already been submitted to the I.O.

¶12

Undoubtedly, the incident appears to be in respect of serious offences. It appears that fire arms were used in the incident.

¶13

What is contended by Mr. Mundargi, however, is that none of these Applicants are alleged to have used the fire arms. The persons who allegedly used fire arms during the incident are the co-accused Pravin, Sandeep and Milind. Sandeep and Milind have been arrested and the said Pravin has not yet been arrested.

BA-671-11==.sxw

Dixit

The Applicants are in custody since February, 2011. Considering the facts that none of these Applicants are said to have used any fire arms during the incident and that the injured and victims have filed affidavits expressing that in future they would live in peace, an opportunity can be granted to the Applicants of availing of liberty. However, as regards the Applicant Nos.2 and 3, i.e. Santosh and Kashinath, I find that one more criminal case registered vide C.R. No.316 of 2011 of the same Police Station is also pending against them. It also appears that, that case also relates, inter alia, to an offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC and fire arms were used in that case also. Apparently, the present offence has been committed by those Applicants while they were on bail in the said C.R. No.316 of 2011. In my opinion, this fact is sufficient to treat their case differently from the case of the other Applicants.

¶18

Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, the Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of as follows :

¶19

(i). The Anticipatory Bail Application, so far as it relates to the Applicant No.2-Santosh and Applicant No.3-Kashinath, is rejected.

¶20

(ii). The Applicant Nos.1, 4, 5 and 6 are ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each, with one surety in like amount, on the condition to report to the Shirur Police Station, Pune, on every Sunday, till the disposal of the case against them,

¶21

[ A.M. THIPSAY, J.]

Ajay Alias Kaka Sudhir Jagdale and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Alias Kaka Sudhir Jagdale 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shrikant @ Tatya @ Vishal Madhavrao Sonavane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Faiyaz Ahmed Chand Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sahahnawaz Mohammed Shahid Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Avinash R. Mishra Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nadiya Faijan Nakhwa Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Shashikant Dhonde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra