Allowed

Sunil Dattatray Yesumali v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Jul 2012BA/710/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal application seeks bail for the accused-applicant facing charges in two separate cases. The court granted bail citing a settlement affidavit by complainants, the applicant's grandmother's death, and the lack of necessity for custody given the case status.

What did the court decide?

Accused-applicant released on bail on PR Bond and surety of Rs.25,000 subject to specific safety and attendance conditions.

Sunil Dattatray Yesumali Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2012)

BA710-12

pvr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.710 OF 2012

¶7

Shri.Sunil Dattatray Yesumali. ...Applicant. vs. State of Maharashtra ...Respondent.

¶8

Mr.Vijay Killedar, for Applicant.

¶9

Smt.V.R.Bhosale, APP for State.

¶10

CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.

¶11

DATED : 4^th July, 2012

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

Heard. The applicant-accused Mr.Sunil who is in custody from 7.10.2011 in C.R.no.146 of 2011 of Miraj City Police Station, has urged for bail. Basically it was informed that the grand-mother of the applicant Smt.Vithabai aged 85-90 years old was bed ridden and gasping, however, it reveals that on 29.6.2012 she has expired.

¶14

The learned Counsel for accused-applicant has tendered affidavit of Mahesh Namdev Kale-the complainant in C.R.No.146 of 2011 and also of the other injured person Mr.Pradeep Prakash Devmane indicating that they have resolved the controversy.

BA710-12

pvr

The investigator informs that there is one more case being C.R.no.122 of 2011 against the applicant-accused Sunil for an offence under Section 147, 148, 149, 326, 504, 506, 323, 427 of I.P.C. In the present Sessions Case charge is framed and the matter is fixed before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangali on 9.7.2012.

¶19

Considering the above features of the matter and the probable outcome of the case by virtue of affidavits of star witnesses, further custody of the accused-applicant is not essential. However, care can be taken to procure his attendance and to maintain peace and tranquility in the area. Hence, order:-

¶20

The applicant-accused Sunil D. Yesumali be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond and surety in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) on the condition to attend the concerned police station on every first Sunday of the Month till the conclusion of the trial. He shall not influence the witnesses and not indulge in identical activities or terrorize the witness.

¶21

The accused/applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

BA710-12

pvr

The accused-applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶26

Infraction of the conditions will result in cancellation of the

¶27

bail.

¶28

The application is allowed to the above extent.

Sunil Dattatray Yesumali v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Dattatray Yesumali 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

Sangramsingh Arun Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Natha Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra

Raju Jairam Chavan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunjjoy Kamlakar Dhanway Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Aslam Gulab Mujawar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sachin Chandrakant Herlekar Vs the State of Maharashtra