Allowed

Akashay S/O Rajanikant Makasare v. the State of Maharashtra Q

Bombay HC25 Oct 2016APPLN/5613/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused apprehended red-handed for dacoity after recovery of weapons and stolen motorcycles. The court noted no criminal antecedents and granted bail on ₹15,000 with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on execution of a Personal Recognizance Bond in the sum of ₹15,000 and furnishing one or more solvent sureties of the like amount.

Akashay S/O Rajanikant Makasare Vs the State of Maharashtra Q — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

(1)Cri. Appln. No. 5613 of 2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

Criminal Application No. 5613 of 2016

¶4

District : Aurangabad

¶5

Akshay s/o. Rajanikant Makasare,
Age : 19 years,
Occupation : Education,
R/o. Bhanushivra,
Taluka : Newasa,
District : Ahmednagar. .. Applicant.

¶6

versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra,
Through MIDC Waluj Police
Station, Aurangabad. .. Respondent.

¶8

............

¶9

Mr. Anil P. Piratwad, Advocate, for the applicant.

¶10

Mr. S.J. Salgare, Addl. Public Prosecutor, for the respondent.

¶11

............

¶12

CORAM : A.M. BADAR, J.

¶13

DATE : 25TH OCTOBER 2016

¶14

ORAL ORDER:

¶15

The applicant / accused in Crime No.
451/2016 registered with MIDC Waluj Police Station,
District Aurangabad, for offences punishable under
Sections 399, 402 of the Indian Penal Code; under
Sections 4 & 25 of the Arms Act and under Section 135
of the Maharashtra Police Act, by this application,

¶16

(2)Cri. Appln. No. 5613 of 2016

¶17

is seeking his release on bail.

¶18

2.Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
applicant / accused as well as the learned Addl.
Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent /
State.

¶19

3.The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor argued
that at the instance of juvenile in conflict with
law, namely Dnyaneshwar Devkar, about 18 stolen
motorcycles were seized. The learned Addl. Public
Prosecutor further argued that the applicant and co-
accused were apprehended red handed when they had
prepared themselves to commit dacoity.

¶20

4.Perused papers of investigation. On the
basis of secret information, a team of Police started
patrolling and found some persons standing near the
Hanuman temple on the road leading to Sajapur. Four
of them were apprehended by Police whereas one
absconded. The applicant is stated to be one amongst
those four apprehended persons. Personal search of
the present applicant has resulted in recovery of a
knife. At the instance of the juvenile in conflict
with law, stolen motorcycles were subsequently
recovered.

¶21

5.Upon being asked, the learned Addl. Public
Prosecutor has stated that so far as present

¶22

(3)Cri. Appln. No. 5613 of 2016

¶23

applicant is concerned, there are no criminal
antecedents. The investigation qua the present
applicant appears to be over. Therefore, his further
pre-trial detention is not required.

¶24

6.Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶25

(a)The Application is allowed.

¶26

(b)The applicant / accused, in the above crime, be
released on bail on his executing P.R. Bond in the
sum of Rs. 15,000/- and on furnishing one or more
solvent sureties of the like amount.

¶27

(c)As conditions of this order, the applicant /
accused shall abide by the following directives :-

¶28

(i) The applicant shall not, directly or
indirectly, make any inducement, threat or
promise to any persons acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade them
from disclosing such facts either to the
Court or to any police officer.

¶29

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with
the prosecution evidence in any manner and
shall cooperate the learned trial Judge in
expeditious disposal of the trial, in the
event of filing charge-sheet against him.

¶30

(4)Cri. Appln. No. 5613 of 2016

¶31

(iii) The applicant shall not repeat
commission of similar type of offences in
future.

¶32

(d)The Application stands disposed of in the above
terms.

¶33

( A.M. BADAR )
 JUDGE

¶34

 puranik / CRIAPPLN5613.16

Akashay S/O Rajanikant Makasare v. the State of Maharashtra Q

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akashay S/O Rajanikant Makasare v. the State of Maharashtra Q

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

Gautam S/O Laxman Raut Vs the State of Maharashtra

Uday S/O Dyaneshwar Ghaiwat Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishwajit S/O Ramesh Kasar Vs the State of Mahrashtra

Yogesh Walmik Magar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kundan S/O Roopsingh Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Navnath Changdeo Jondhale Vs Shiva Bhima Telang and Others