This applicant filed a bail application arguing that bail should be granted as other accused were released. The Court rejected the plea, holding the facts involve pre-planned kidnapping, ransom, and danger to witnesses.
Criminal Application rejected; Trial Court directed to dispose of the case within nine months.
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.
( 1 ) cria1169.17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1169 OF 2017
Shrikant s/o. Mallikarjun Swami
..Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra..Respondent
Mr.Satish A. Gaikwad, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr.S.M. Ganachari, A.P.P. for respondent/State.
CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE,J. DATED : 19.04.2017
P.C. :-
1.This application is filed for bail. Both the
sides are heard. In view of order made on 05.12.2016
previous application bearing Criminal Application No.
5771 of 2016, it was necessary for the applicant to show
the change in the circumstances. The learned Counsel for
the applicant submitted that prior to filing of Criminal
Application No. 5771 of 2016, some accused from the said
crime were granted bail, but that circumstance is not
considered by this Court, while rejecting Criminal
Application No.5771 of 2016. So, present application is
filed.
2.The case of the applicant cannot be taken as
similar to the case of the persons to whom bail is
( 2 ) cria1169.17
granted. This Court made attempt to collect the record
to ascertain as to whether there is possibility of
absconding etc. Initially this Court was thinking to
grant bail, but it appears that present applicant, whose
surname is Swami was got involved in the matter, as one
Swami from Chennai had made arrangement to bring the
victim – Sohamlal to Latur district and they wanted to
extract ransom of Rs.30 lakh from the relatives of
Sohamlal. This Court has carefully gone through the
statements of Sohamlal, Shashikumar and Babulal. They
were detained by the present applicant and his associates
right from 11.05.2016 to 15.05.2016. Due to the
information, police had traced the vehicle in which they
were taking Sohamlal and Shashikumar, but they did not
stop the vehicle. They drove the vehicle against police
person to finish him and then one vehicle was found on
road which was creating disturbance. Intentionally a
dash was also given to that vehicle. They caused fracture
injury to Sohamlal. These acts of the persons of the
gang of the present applicant show that everything was
pre-planned. At the young age present applicant was
holding air-gun for committing offence of aforesaid
nature. The charge-sheet is filed for offence punishable
under sections 307, 353, 120-B etc. of the Indian Penal
Code. It can be said that the offence of kidnapping and
ransom can also be tried against present applicant and
they are shown in the police papers.
3.It can be said that though the incident is
started at Chennai, the entire case can be decided from
the Court at Latur. The applicant is behind the bar since
15.05.2016. Due to these circumstances, only direction
can be given to the Trial Court to expedite hearing of
the case. It will not be safe to release to applicant on
bail. He will be danger to the prosecution witnesses.
There is possibility that the applicant will again get
indulged in similar activity. There has been no change in
the circumstances since rejection of previous
application.
4.In the result, the Criminal Application is
rejected. The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the
case within nine months from today.
snk/2017/APR17/ cria1169.17
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the circumstances have sufficiently changed to justify granting bail after a previous application was rejected.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Criminal Application No. 5771 of 2016Referred¶1
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Shrikant s/o. Mallikarjun Swami
The State of Maharashtra
T.V. Nalawade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court