Single judge granted pre-arrest bail to applicants accused of theft and related offenses, affirming a prior ad-interim order as the prosecution failed to justify continued detention.
Pre-arrest bail allowed on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000 with sureties and compliance with stated conditions.
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.
Cri.Appln305.13
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 305 OF 2013
1.Mahadeo S/o Ramrao Dhole
Age : 23 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o Sarola, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
2.Tukaram S/o Ramrao Dhole
Age : 30 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o Sarola, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
...APPLICANTS
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Ashti Police Station,
Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed.
...RESPONDENT
.....
Mr. Anant Devkate, advocate for Applicants.
Mr. G.R. Ingole, A.P.P. for respondent.
.....
CORAM : P.D. KODE, J.
DATE: 27th FEBRUARY, 2013
ORAL ORDER :
1.Heard.
2.Say filed by the prosecution pursuant to
the notice is taken on record.
3.Application for pre-arrest bail. Ad-
interim order is already granted on 1st February,
Cri.Appln305.13 -2-
2013. The prosecution say does not reveal any
sufficient reason for which the custodial
interrogation of the applicants is necessary for
completion of investigation. The stolen property is
in possession of the State. The vehicle used for
commission of offence is also seized. No case made
out for non-granting relief as sought. Application
is allowed. Ad-interim order stands confirmed for
the same reasons for which same was passed and the
reasons stated hereinabove, on the following terms.
4.Inform Investigating Officer of Crime
No.150/2012 registered with Ashti Police Station,
Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed for offence under Section 379
r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 48(7)(8) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue
Code and under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicle Act
that in the event of arrest of the applicants in
connection with the said crime, the applicants
shall be forthwith released on bail on each of them
furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-
(Rs. Fifty thousand) with one or more sureties to
make up the like amount and subject to the
conditions that Applicants :
(i)shall attend the Investigating Officer every
day in between 11.00 a.m. to 1 p.m. for first seven
days and thereafter as and when summoned by him in
connection with the investigation.
(ii)shall stay at the addresses mentioned in the
Cri.Appln305.13
-3-
Application and shall not change the same without
permission of the Court.
(iii)shall not, directly or indirectly, make
any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the accusation
levelled against them so as to dissuade him/her
from disclosing such facts to the Investigating
Officer.
(iv)shall not misuse the liberty granted by this
order for committing any offence.
5.The Application stands disposed of in the
above terms.
sga/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for pre-arrest bail should be allowed as the prosecution did not establish sufficient need for custodial interrogation.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Mahadeo S/o Ramrao Dhole
Tukaram S/o Ramrao Dhole
The State of Maharashtra
P.D. Kode
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court