Allowed

Ajay Mahadeo Shinge v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Sept 2014BA/1348/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed regular bail to a magisterial court accuser facing serious charges including culpable homicide attempt and affray. The judge noted the principal accused was already on bail and the charge of property damage was bailable.

What did the court decide?

The Application for bail is allowed. The impugned sentence is suspended pending appeal, upon furnishing PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- with sureties.

Ajay Mahadeo Shinge Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

Prod11.BA1348_2014.doc

¶2

Vidya Amin

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1348 OF 2014

¶5

Ajay Mahadeo Shinge … Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶6

Mr. Vikas B. Shivarkar, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for the State. I.O. Mr. K.Y. Gavade, P.S.I., Nigadi Police Station, Pune present.

¶7

CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 24^th September, 2014.

¶8

P.C.

¶9

The application is moved for regular bail, as the applicant/accused is facing charges under sections 307, 324, 143, 147, 148, 149, 427 of the Indian Penal Code. One Surendrasingh U. Rathod has given the information to the police, pursuant to which, an offence is registered at C.R. No.71 of 2014 with Nigdi police station, Pune.

¶10

The incident of assault and damaging the property has taken place on 10^th February, 2014. It is the case of the complainant that on 10.2.2014, when Yogesh Sawant was going on a motor vehicles, he dashed the informant. At that time, the informant questioned him to which Yogesh Sawant abused him and started hitting him. So the informant came home and on the same day, at around 18.00 hours,

¶11

1 of 4

¶12

Prod11.BA1348_2014.doc

¶13

Yogesh Sawant alongwith his two associates including applicant/accused went to his house on motor vehicles and questioned the informant as to why did he report the incident to the police. Thereafter on the same day, at around 22.30 hours, when the complainant was standing outside the house along with his maternal brother and neighbour, Yogesh Sawant, applicant/accused and co-accused arrived there and started abusing and assaulted the informant with knife on neck. The assailants also assaulted his brother and the neighbour with wooden rod and with fist blows and thereafter they ran away. However, they damaged 19 motor vehicles which were parked.

¶14

The learned Counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that the principal accused Yogesh Sawant, who is attributed the role of assault, is granted pre-arrest bail. No injury is found on the neck of the informant. He submitted that section 427 of IPC of damaging property is bailable. The applicant/accused does not have any criminal antecedants. He further submitted that the applicant/accused is in prison since 29/4/2014 and, therefore, he be released on bail.

¶15

Learned Prosecutor opposed the application. She submitted that the applicant/accused and other accused, who are facing charges under section 149 for damage of 19 motor vehicles standing outside the house

¶16

2 of 4

¶17

Prod11.BA1348_2014.doc

¶18

and therefore, regular bail is to be rejected.

¶19

The principal accused Yogesh Sawant was granted bail by an order dated 1^st September, 2014 as no incised wound was found on the neck of the informant/injured. The role attributed to applicant/accused is mainly under sections 427 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Though it is serious that the applicant/accused and co-accused damaged the motor vehicles standing outside the house, however, section 427 of the Indian Penal Code is bailable. There are no criminal antecedents against the applicant/accused. In view of this, this is a fit case to grant bail to the applicant/accused. Accordingly, the Application for bail is allowed on the following terms:

¶20

i) The impugned sentence of the applicant is suspended pending appeal;

¶21

ii) The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶22

iii) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence or shall not pressurise the witnesses in any manner and shall not indulge into any criminal activity including of terrorizing or unlawful assembly, while on bail.

¶23

3 of 4

¶24

Prod11.BA1348_2014.doc

¶25

iv) The applicant shall stay away from the jurisdiction of the Nigdi police station, Pune till January, 2015 except for giving attendance in the Court or at the police station, if required.

¶26

iv) In the event the applicant changes his residence, he shall communicate the new address to the concerned police station;

¶27

v) The applicant shall make himself available at the time of hearing of the appeal.

¶28

vi) Any breach of the above conditions by the applicant, shall result into cancellation of bail, forthwith.

¶29

The Application is disposed of on the above terms.

¶30

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶31

4 of 4

Ajay Mahadeo Shinge v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Mahadeo Shinge 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

Amar Tanaji Lokhande Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kumar Dattatraya Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishnu Digambar Shinde (Patil) Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jaywant Prabhakar Bhande Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suresh Bhujanga Bhandary Vs Sushma Bhandary

Mrs. Deepali Milind Surve Vs Mr. Milind Manohar Surve and Anr.