Allowed

Amol Ramchandra Nikam v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC11 Jul 2014APPA/793/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three applicants convicted of dacoity under IPC challenged their sentences pending appeal. The High Court suspended the sentences and released them on bail with bonds of Rs.25,000 each, noting they had served nearly four years in prison without other pending cases.

What did the court decide?

Impugned sentences suspended pending appeal; applicants released on bail furnishing P.R. Bonds of Rs.25,000/ each with one or two sureties.

Amol Ramchandra Nikam Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

APPA717 & &98_2014.doc

¶2

Vidya Amin

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 717 OF 2014 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 564 OF 2014

¶5

Datta Bhimrao Tonape … Applicant

¶6

vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶8

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 798 OF 2014 IN

¶9

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 563 OF 2014

¶10

Santosh Tatyaba Ghadage … Applicant

¶11

vs.

¶12

The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶13

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 793 OF 2014 IN

¶14

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 565 OF 2014

¶15

Amol Ramchandra Nikam

¶16

… Applicant

¶17

vs.

¶18

The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶19

Mr. Prashant Patil, Advocate for the applicant in Cri. Application No. 717/2014.

¶20

Mr. Sandip L. Babar, Advocate for the applicants in Cri. Application Nos 798/2014 and 793/2014.

¶21

Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for the State.

¶22

CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 11^th July, 2014.

¶23

P.C.

¶24

These Applications are moved for bail by the appellants/applicants.

¶25

The appeals are filed against the judgment and order dated 15.7.2013

¶26

1 of 4

¶27

APPA717 & &98_2014.doc

¶28

passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Satara convicting the applicants/appellants for the offences punishable under sections 395 r/w 120B, 397 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants/appellants alongwith other convicts had stopped the bus and robbed cash of Rs.12 lacs and gold ornaments worth Rs.50,000/ from the passengers in the bus. The applicant assaulted some passengers and the cleaner at the time of dacoity. Hence, 13 persons were prosecuted and 12 persons were convicted for 7 years.

¶29

As per the case of the prosecution, applicantDatta Tonape was holding stick and amount of Rs.3,69,000/ was recovered from him; applicantSantosh Ghadage was holding pistol and an amount of Rs.27,000/ was recovered from him; and applicant Amol Nikam was holding weapon and amount of Rs.10,000/ was recovered from him.

¶30

Learned Counsel for the applicants/appellants has submitted that

¶31

the incident of robbery has taken place on 3.12.2009. The applicants were arrested on 12.12.2009. They are in prison since last 4½ years and, therefore, they be released on bail.

¶32

The learned Prosecutor has opposed the application. She has

¶33

2 of 4

¶34

APPA717 & &98_2014.doc

¶35

submitted that the applicants are convicted for 7 years for a serious offence of dacoity on the bus.

¶36

Perused the impugned judgment and order. The

¶37

applicants/appellants have undergone a period of 4½ years of their sentence in prison. On verification, it is found that besides this case, neither any case is pending against them nor they are prosecuted for any other offence. The appeals are of the year 2014 and, therefore, considering the pendency of the matters before this Court, it is not possible to take up these Appeals in the near future. Hence, in view of the above, the following order is passed:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

(i) The impugned sentences of the applicants/appellants Datta Bhimrao Tonape, Santosh Tatyaba Ghadage and Amol Ramchandra Nikam are suspended pending appeal;

¶40

ii) The applicants/appellants are released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/ each with one or two sureties in the like amount, pending appeal;

¶41

iii) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and shall not indulge into any criminal activity while on bail;

¶42

iv) In the event the applicants changes their residence, they shall

¶43

3 of 4

¶44

APPA717 & &98_2014.doc

¶45

communicate the new address to the concerned police station;

¶46

v) The applicants shall make themselves available at the time of hearing of the appeals.

¶47

The Criminal Applications are disposed of in the above terms.

¶48

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶49

4 of 4

Amol Ramchandra Nikam v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amol Ramchandra Nikam 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

B.D.Goel,Asstt.Collector of Custom Bombay. Vs Ebrahim Essa Sodha and Anr.

Hiralal Karbhari Sabale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jainarayan Omprakash Agarwal Vs Union of India

Datta Bhimrao Tonape Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arun Shankar Mehendale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Tatyaba Ghadage Vs the State of Maharashtra