Allowed

Rahul Asaram Pandit and Ors. v. the State of Mah

Bombay HC25 Feb 2013APPLN/388/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application by four accused persons. The Additional Public Prosecutor noted no overt acts were committed. The court confirmed an earlier ad-interim bail order, fixing surety amounts and imposing conditions like residing at a fixed address and not threatening witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Ad-interim direction confirmed; applicants to be released on bail upon furnishing Rs. 25,000 bond with one surety, subject to conditions.

Rahul Asaram Pandit and Ors. Vs the State of Mah — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

Cri.Appln388.13

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 388 OF 2013

¶5

1.Rahul S/o Asaram Pandit
Age : 29 years, Occ : Labourer,
R/o Manwat, Tq. Manwat,
Dist. Parbhani.
2.Vijay S/o Sanjay Pandit
Age : 30 years, Occ : Labourer,
R/o Phule Nagar, Manwat,
Dist. Parbhani.
3.Gautam S/o Shankarrao Pandit
Age : 35 years, Occ : Labour,
R/o Juna Pathri road,
Manwat, Dist. Parbhani.
4.Suresh S/o Shankarrao Pandit
Age : 34 years, Occ : Labour,
R/o As above.
...APPLICANTS
Versus
State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station Manwat, Tq. Manwat,
Dist. Parbhani.
...RESPONDENTS

¶6

.....

¶7

Mr. S.S. Rathi, advocate for Applicants.
Mrs.V.A. Shinde, A.P.P. for respondent/State.
.....

¶8

CORAM : P.D. KODE, J.
 DATE: 25th FEBRUARY, 2013

¶9

ORAL ORDER :

¶10

1.The learned A.P.P. opted to argue the

¶11

Cri.Appln388.13 -2-

¶12

matter without filing reply. She has further stated
that she has perused the diary, but could not find
any material therein revealing overt act committed
by the applicants in the incident in question for
which the crime is registered.

¶13

2.In view of the learned A.P.P. have fairly
stated that no overt act was committed by the
applicants and the person who had assaulted the
complainant has been already released on
anticipatory bail by the Court of Sessions, the
application deserves to be allowed. Needless to
add, the same deserves to be allowed as in such
circumstances, hardly any case could be visualized
for necessity of custodial interrogation.
Furthermore, no breach of any condition or non-
cooperation with the Police is reported. Hence, ad-
interim direction given on 23rd January, 2013 in
favour of the applicants is hereby confirmed, on
following terms.

¶14

3.Inform the Investigating Officer of Crime
No.1/2013 registered with Manwat Police Station,
Parbhani, Tq. & Dist. Parbhani for offence under
Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504, 506 of
the Indian Penal Code that in the event of arrest
of applicants in connection with above referred
crime, they shall be forthwith released on bail
upon each of them furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum
of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five thousand) with one
solvent surety in the like amount and subject to

¶15

Cri.Appln388.13

¶16

-3-

¶17

the conditions that applicants :-

¶18

(i)shall attend the Investigating Officer
whenever summoned by him.

¶19

(ii)shall stay at the addresses mentioned in the
application and shall not change the same without
the permission of the Court.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(iv)shall not commit any offence while enjoying
the benefits granted under this order.

¶22

4.The Application stands disposed of in the
aforesaid terms.

¶23

sga/

Rahul Asaram Pandit and Ors. v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Asaram Pandit and Ors. v. the State of Mah

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

Prabhakar Pandurang Chaudhari Vs the State of Mah

Shankar Sakharam Garde and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Pandurang Kashiba Divase Vs the State of Maharashtra

Satish Vasant Kalyankar Vs the State of Mah

Shaikh Shakeer Shaikh Babu Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bharatabai Keshavrao Bhalerao Vs Pravin Narayan Kadam and Others