Allowed

The State of Maharashtra v. Balu @ Pradeep Pandurang Kamble

Bombay HC9 Apr 2013APPA/170/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court cancelled bail granted to the respondent/appellant in Criminal Appeal No.427 of 2000 due to his failure to satisfy bail conditions by committing multiple serious offences, including murder, after bail was granted, despite prior bail in the lower court.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted vide order dated 22.11.2000 is cancelled; process issued for taking respondent in custody and sending him to prison during pendency of appeal.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Balu @ Pradeep… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2013)

PPD

APPA.170-13.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.170 OF 2013 [FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL] IN

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.427 OF 2000

¶7

The State of Maharashtra ..Applicant [Orig.Respondent]

¶8

Versus

¶9

Balu @ Pradeep Pandurang Kamble ..Respondent [Orig.Appellant]

¶10

Mr. H.J. Dedhia, APP for the Applicant – State. Mr. Vishal Kolekar, Advocate for the Respondent.

¶11

CORAM : P.V. HARDAS, & A.R. JOSHI, JJ.

¶12

DATE : 09^th APRIL, 2013

¶13

ORAL ORDER : [PER A.R. JOSHI,J.]

¶14

Heard rival submissions on present application preferred by the State of Maharashtra praying for cancellation of the bail granted to the respondent/appellant/convicted accused.

¶15

The respondent/appellant was charged for the offence punishable under Sections 364, 419, 394, 302, 363, 461, 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code along with his one another associate. They were tried and convicted for the aforesaid charges. Present respondent/appellant challenged the conviction by preferring Criminal Appeal No.427 of 2000. Said appeal was admitted on 22.11.2000 and present respondent/appellant was granted bail on the same day on PR

1 / 4

APPA.170-13.doc

bond of G5000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶20

Earlier when the matter was before the another Bench of which one of us (A.R. Joshi, J.) was one of the members, a representation was made before that Bench on behalf of the husband of the victim woman who was abducted and killed by the respondent/appellant. In the said representation it was prayed by the said aggrieved party for cancellation of bail of the present respondent/appellant mainly on the ground that even during pendency of the Sessions trial he had committed various offences of serious nature, mainly, punishable under Sections 392, 394, 395 of Indian Penal Code and also under the Arms Act, and even after the conviction in the Sessions Case of abduction and murder of the victim woman, the respondent/appellant had committed further more offences after bail was granted to him in the appeal in the year 2000. During hearing of the said representation, it was submitted on behalf of the State of Maharashtra that the State is preferring separate application for cancellation of bail of the present respondent/appellant. Under this premise, present application under consideration came to be lodged giving details of the criminal antecedents of the respondent/appellant.

¶21

During the arguments and after perusal of the affidavit filed by the Senior Inspector of Police Shri Rathod attached to Vishrantwadi Police Station, Pune, we have found out that even after availing the bail in the Criminal Appeal, present respondent/appellant had indulged in the following offences :

2 / 4

APPA.170-13.doc

(a) C.R. No.15 of 2001 under Sections 324, 504 r.w. 34 of IPC registered at Vishrantwadi Police Station;

¶26

(b) C.R. No.75 of 2003 under Sections 302, 324, 506, r.w. 34 of IPC registered with Vishrantwadi Police Station;

¶27

¶28

Apart from the above offences which were committed by the respondent/appellant after filing the appeal in the year 2000, he had earlier committed various such offences even during pendency of the trial of the Sessions Case in which the present appeal is preferred. Said earlier offences are as under :

¶29

(i) C.R. No.76 of 1994 under Sections 394, 341 r.w. 34 of IPC r.w. 3 & 25 of Arms Act registered at Vishrantwadi Police Station;

¶30

(ii) C.R. No.116 of 1994 under Sections 3 and 25 of Arms Act registered at Vishrantwadi Police Station;

¶31

(iii) C.R. No.9 of 1997 under Sections 143, 341, 427 of IPC registered at Vishrantwadi Police Station;

¶32

(iv) C.R. No.357 of 1993 under Sections 392 r.w. 34 of IPC of Yerwada Police Station, Pune;

¶33

(v) C.R. No.223 of 1993 under Sections 160 of IPC of Khadaki Police Station, Pune City.

¶34

From the material available on record as discussed above, it is very much clear that the present respondent/appellant had flouted

3 / 4

APPA.170-13.doc

the conditions of bail granted to him while admitting his Criminal Appeal No.427 of 2000. Considering the said history, definitely it is not in the fitness of the circumstances to continue the liberty of bail granted in his favour earlier.

¶39

In the result, present application is allowed and the bail earlier granted to the present respondent/appellant vide order dated 22.11.2000 is hereby cancelled. Appropriate process be issued against the respondent/appellant for taking him in custody and sending him in prison during pendency and final disposal of the pending Criminal Appeal No.427 of 2000.

¶40

(A. R. JOSHI, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)

¶41

4 / 4

The State of Maharashtra v. Balu @ Pradeep Pandurang Kamble

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra v. Balu @ Pradeep Pandurang Kamble

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

Nitin Laxman Bhangre Vs the State of Maharashtra

Tulshiram @ Tilsa Ramcahndra Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Asgar Kadar Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Monika Bhaskar Joshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Somnath Saiyaji Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Ganesh Tukaram Dongare and Ors.