Allowed

Rahematsingh Mulsingh Rajput @ Ranjitsingh Premsingh Dasana v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC20 Dec 2013APPLN/3683/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding robbery charges, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad allowed bail. The Court noted the applicant's prior convictions and pending cases but found it not desirable to keep him in custody pending further material collection.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing personal and surety bonds of Rs.50,000/- each from Ahmednagar District.

Rahematsingh Mulsingh Rajput @ Ranjitsingh Premsingh… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

1 appln3683-13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3683 OF 2013

¶4

Rahematsingh s/o Mulsingh Rajput ... Applicant @ Ranjitsingh Premsingh Dasana

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent

¶7

Shri R. K. Temkar for the applicant. Shri S. G. Karlekar, APP for the State.

¶8

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J. DATE : 20^th December, 2013

¶9

PER COURT :

¶10

The application is filed for bail. Both sides are heard.

¶11

This Court has gone through the papers of investigation. By way of precaution, this Court had directed the investigating agency to ascertain whether the applicant has permanent place of residence and he will not abscond. Investigating agency has shown some record in that regard. In the order dated 26^th September, 2013, this Court has considered the record that at least 4 offences are registered in the past against the applicant. He has undergone sentence and he had came out of jail in the year year 2012. He was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 295, 397 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. At present two cases are pending against him, one at Sessions Court, Thane and other case is pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai. However, it is not informed to the Court that he is required or wanted in any other case.

¶12

1/3

¶13

2 appln3683-13

¶14

The crime is registered on the basis of report given by one Vikram Bora. He and his cousin had came from Virar (Mumbai) to Sangemnar by ST Bus with gold ornaments worth Rs.31 lakhs. There are allegations that when they were at Sangamner ST Stand, four persons robbed them of bag containing ornaments. They were having fire arms and one of them had actually fired to create fear.

¶15

Charge sheet is filed against the applicant and others for the offences punishable under Section 394, 120-B and 411 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 read with 25 of the Arms Act.

¶16

The learned counsel submits that the applicant has been behind bar since 19^th December, 2012. Some accused are shown as absconding and the charge sheet is filed against them under Section 299 of the Criminal Procedure Code. One Shiva Shetty, absconding accused no.5 came to be arrested recently. This Court did not decide the application as there was possibility of collecting more materials against the present applicant. The allegations made show that no additional material against the applicant could be collected during interrogation of Shiva Shetty.

¶17

There is allegation against the present applicant is that he had given tip of the two persons who were carrying gold ornaments. There is allegations against the applicant that he had received his share of Rs.1 lakh from the aforesaid robbery. The police have collected material against the applicant of the nature that he had received his share and he had deposited the said amount in a Bank. On 09.11.2012 he deposited Rs.25,000/- and on 12.11.2012 he deposited Rs.12.11.2012. The incident took place on 07.11.2012.

¶18

2/3

¶19

3 appln3683-13

¶20

It appears that the prosecution will be proving that he had deposited amount of Rs.25,000/- on 12.11.2012 and Rs.5,000/- on 9.11.2012 in the account of one Udaysingh and that account was also operated by the present applicant. This evidence is as against the applicant for proving that he was involved in the conspiracy.

¶21

In view of the aforesaid nature of material, this Court holds that it is not desirable to keep the applicant behind till the final disposal of the case against him. In the result, the application is allowed.

¶22

The applicant is is to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R and S.B of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount from Ahmednagar District. The applicant is not to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. The applicant is not to commit similar offence.

¶23

( T. V. NALAWADE J. )

¶24

JPC

¶25

3/3

Rahematsingh Mulsingh Rajput @ Ranjitsingh Premsingh Dasana v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahematsingh Mulsingh Rajput @ Ranjitsingh Premsingh Dasana 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Salim Fatehmohammed Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishnupant Chaburao Khaire Vs Sanjay Haribhau Andhale and Another

Manoj Vitthal Ingale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dhondiram Santoba Nagargoje Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sabir Kasim Mansuri/Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Shivaji Wamanrao Deshmukh and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anohter