Allowed

Sharda Bansi Sahu v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC17 Oct 2015BA/1569/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay (Criminal) granted bail to the applicant in a case involving offences under the Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act, noting he was identified only in a supplementary charge-sheet lacking victim identification.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail on executing a PR bond of Rs. 15,000 with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to specific conditions for attendance and non-contact with witnesses.

Sharda Bansi Sahu Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

BA 1569-15.doc

¶2

Anand

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1569 OF 2015

¶5

Sharda Bansi Sahu.Applicant

¶6

 v/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra .Respondent

¶8

Mr.Aniket U. Nikam, Advocate, for the Applicant
Ms Veera Shinde, APP, for the Respondent – State

¶9

CORAM:REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶10

DATE :17.10.2015

¶11

P.C.

¶12

.Heard learned counsel for the applicant

¶13

and the learned APP for the respondent – State.

¶14

2.By this application, the applicant

¶15

seeks his enlargement on bail in connection with

¶16

C.R.No.243 of 2014 registered with the
Faraskhana Police Station, Pune, for the alleged
offences punishable under Sections 323, 344,
366, 504, 506 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code
and under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 of the

¶17

1 of 5

¶18

BA 1569-15.doc

¶19

Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act.

¶20

3.Learned counsel for the applicant

¶21

states that the name of the present applicant
was not disclosed in the first chargesheet

¶22

which was filed in the aforesaid C.R. on
06.04.2015. He submits that the applicant was
arrested on 15.05.2015 and the supplementary

¶23

chargesheet against him was filed on
15.07.2015. He submits that the only allegation
qua the present applicant is that the coaccused
Mahesh asked him to take the victim girl to

¶24

accused Nos.1 & 2, who were brothel owner and

¶25

manager respectively. He submits that the victim
girl has not identified the present applicant as
being the person with whom she had gone. He
submits that even in the first chargesheet, the
applicant was not named.

¶26

2 of 5

¶27

BA 1569-15.doc

¶28

4.Learned APP does not dispute the

¶29

aforesaid facts.

¶30

5.Perused the papers. It appears that the

¶31

only allegation qua the present applicant is

¶32

that he transported the victim girl on the
instructions of the coaccused – Mahesh, who is
absconding. He took the victim girl to the
accused Nos.1 & 2 and dropped her with them i.e.
the brothel owner and manager. Investigation is
complete and chargesheet is filed. There are no
antecedents qua the present applicant.

¶33

6.Considering the same, the applicant is
enlarged on bail on the following terms &
conditions:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail, on

¶36

executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/

¶37

with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶38

3 of 5

¶39

BA 1569-15.doc

¶40

(ii) The applicant shall attend the Faras

¶41

Khana Police Station, Pune on the first

¶42

Saturday of every month between 10:00 a.m. to
11:00 a.m. till the conclusion of the trial;

¶43

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper or

¶44

attempt to influence or contact the complainant,
witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

¶45

(iv) The applicant shall inform his latest

¶46

place of residence and mobile contact number
immediately after being released and/or
change of residence or mobile details, if any,

¶47

from time to time to the Court seized of the
matter and to the Investigating Officer of the
concerned Police Station;

¶48

(v) The applicant to cooperate with the
conduct of the trial;

¶49

(vi)The applicant shall file an undertaking

¶50

with regard to Clause Nos.(ii) to (v) within two
weeks of his release;

¶51

4 of 5

¶52

BA 1569-15.doc

¶53

(vii) If there is a breach of any of the
aforesaid conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to seek cancellation of the
applicant's bail.

¶54

aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶55

8. It is made clear that the observations

¶56

made herein are prima facie, and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶57

All concerned to act on the

¶58

authenticated copy of this order.

¶59

( REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

¶60

5 of 5

Sharda Bansi Sahu v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharda Bansi Sahu v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Parvez Dawood Ali Sheikh and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Seema Sandip Chandra Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amol Vibhishan Dain and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jagdish I. Yadav and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Subhash Annaso Gotkhinde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arjun Tulsappa Vanjole Vs the State of Maharashtra