Allowed

Deepak Umashankar Vishvkarma v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC27 Oct 2015BA/896/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the applicant sought enlargement on bail for dacoity and abetting offences. The court observed the lack of material connecting the applicant, due to insufficient recovery evidence and non-identification in the parade, and consequently granted bail on standard terms. The order is prima facie and not to influence the Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Allowed on executing PR Bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one or two sureties in like amount and subject to standard conditions of appearance and non-tampering.

Deepak Umashankar Vishvkarma Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2015)

925-aba.896.2015

1/4

nsc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 896 OF 2015

¶5

Deepak Umashankar Vishvkarma ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶6

Mr.M.M.Badgujar i/b Mr.Shaikh Waseem Shaikh Isa, for the Applicant

¶7

Mr.S.S.Pednekar, A.P.P for the Respondent-State

¶8

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 27^th OCTOBER, 2015

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P.

¶11

By this application, the applicant seeks his enlargement on bail

¶12

in connection with C.R. No.I-130 of 2014, registered with the Karad Police Station, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 396, 120(B) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that there is no

¶14

material to connect the applicant with the alleged offence. He submitted

1/4

925-aba.896.2015

2/4

that the only allegation qua the present applicant is recovery of Rs.29,240/-. He states that the said money allegedly recovered is not identifiable and as such the said recovery will have no evidentiary value. He submitted that the applicant has not been identified in the Identification Parade and that there is absolutely no material qua the present applicant.

¶19

Learned APP on instructions of the Investigating Officer who is present in Court fairly accepts that apart from the recovery of Rs.29,240/- there is no material to connect the applicant with the alleged offence. He submitted that after filing of the charge-sheet, identification parade was held and that the applicant has not been identified in the Test Identification Parade. He also states that the present applicant has no antecedents.

¶20

In view of what is stated aforesaid, the applicant is enlarged on bail on the following terms and conditions :

¶21

ORDER

¶22

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;

2/4

925-aba.896.2015

3/4

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on the first Saturday of every month between 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. for a period of 12 months after his release and thereafter once in three months, till the conclusion of the trial;

¶27

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

¶28

(iv) The applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and mobile contact number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Court seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station;

¶29

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

3/4

925-aba.896.2015

4/4

The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶34

It is made clear that the observations 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.

¶35

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶36

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶37

4/4

Deepak Umashankar Vishvkarma v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Umashankar Vishvkarma 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

Yogesh Ashok Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kamil Mustafa Shaikh @ Raju Bhai Vs the State of Maharashtra

Javed Ibrahim Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mubarak Lalsab Nadaf Vs the State of Maharashtra

Babalu Dukhbandhu Shahoo Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ajay Bhagoji Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra