Single judge rejected an application seeking cancellation of bail granted to an accused in a criminal case regarding a civil dispute, holding no error in relying on the pending civil suit and lack of necessity for continued detention.
Application for cancellation of bail rejected.
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.
1/2 (25)APPLN-19-13
Tilak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.19 of 2013
| Ranvir Kumar Bindeswari Singh | ... | Applicant |
|---|---|---|
| versus | ||
| State of Maharashtra & Anr | ... | Respondents |
Ms.Rebecca Dias i/b M/s.Maharashtra Legal Associates for the applicant.
Mrs.G.P. Mulekar, APP for the State.
Dr.Ranvir Singh Bindeswari Singh applicant present in Court.
CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : JULY 15, 2013
P.C.
1 Heard Ms.Rebecca Dias, learned counsel for the applicant. Heard Mrs.G.P. Mulekar, learned APP for the State. I have also heard the applicant who is present in person, on his request.
2 The applicant is the First Informant in C.R.No.240 of 2012 registered at Amboli Police Station. The said C.R. is in respect of offences punishable under sections 452 IPC, 448 IPC, 342 IPC, 323 IPC read with section 34 of the IPC. The main accused in the said case Arjun Chari – respondent no.2 herein – was released on bail by the Court of Sessions by its order dated 26 November 2012. The applicant being aggrieved by the said order, has approached this Court praying that the bail granted to the respondent no.2, be cancelled.
2/2 (25)APPLN-19-13
3 I have gone through the order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. He was of the view that the dispute was basically of a civil nature. He also observed that civil dispute between the parties was pending on the given date. He further observed that the respondent no.2 had been in custody for about 20 days, and further detention of the respondent no.2 was not necessary.
4 I do not find any error or illegality in the order passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, releasing the respondent no.2 on bail.
5 The grievance of the applicant seems to be that possession of the premises belonging to him has been forcibly taken over by the respondent no.2. His grievance also seems to be that proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and several other proceedings have been initiated in the matter, but these proceedings are pending before different Courts, without any progress. If that is so, the applicant can seek any other appropriate remedy. Cancellation of bail cannot be a remedy in that regard.
6 Even otherwise, as there is nothing improper or illegal in the order granting bail, the question of cancellation thereof, does not arise.
7 Application is rejected.
( ABHAY M.THIPSAY,J )
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order releasing the accused on bail in a criminal case involving a civil dispute is sustainable.
Whether cancellation of bail is the appropriate remedy for disputes regarding civil possession pending before other courts.
Ranvir Kumar Bindeswari Singh
State of Maharashtra
Arjun Chari
Abhay M. Thipsay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
