Applicants in custody for over three and half years without trial commencement were granted bail by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, noting weak identification evidence and recovery of some property without satisfactory description.
Applicants released on bail in Rs. 25,000 each with one surety in the same amount.
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.
7ba184-14.sxw
spb/
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 184 OF 2014
… Applicants.
(Org.Accused Nos.2 & 11)
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent.
Mr. S. A. Shaikh, for the Applicants. Mrs. S. V. Sonawane, APP for the State.
Mr. P. S. Naik, P.S. I. of Vikramghad Police Station, is present
CORAM : A. M. THIPSAY, J. DATE : 11 JUNE, 2014
P.C. :
1 Heard the learned counsel for the Applicants and the learned APP for the State. With their assistance, I have gone through the application and the annexures thereto.
2 The Applicants are in custody since 10.10.2010. The trial has not yet commenced.
3 Some of the co-accused in this case have already been released on bail by this Court by different orders passed from time to time.
1/2
Borey
7ba184-14.sxw
spb/
4 It appears that the offenders were not known previously to the first informant and the eye witnesses. However, it appears that the suspects including the present Applicants were shown to the first informant at the police station on 10.12.2010. It appears that thereafter, a test identification parade was also held. Interestingly, in the test identification parade, the Applicant No.1 could not be identified by the witnesses. The Applicant No.2 could be identified but only under such circumstances. Additionally, part of the robbed property is said to have been recovered at the instance of each of the Applicants. However, there is no satisfactory identification of the property, inasmuch as the description of the robbed property has not been given in the first information report.
5 Considering this and more particularly, that the Applicants are in the custody for a period of more than three and half years and the trial has not yet commenced, I think it proper to release the Applicants on bail.
7 The Applicants are ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety in the like amount.
2/2
Borey
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants, in custody since over three and a half years without trial commencement despite weak identification evidence, should be released on bail.
Whether the non-identification of Applicant No.1 and conditional identification of Applicant No.2 justify bail release.
Pima Kasana Mavi
Bhuriya Sakala Mavi
The State of Maharashtra
A. M. Thipsay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
