Allowed

Lalsing Amarsing Barela (Pawara) v. the State of Maharashtra.

Bombay HC23 Jan 2017APPLN/282/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The high court allowed an application for bail by the original accused who was remanded to custody after issuing non-bailable warrants following non-compliance with section 390 CrPC. The court granted release on a personal bond viewing continued detention as punitive prior to appeal hearing.

What did the court decide?

Released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one solvent surety in like amount.

Lalsing Amarsing Barela (Pawara) Vs the State of Maharashtra. — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

1 Cri.A-282-17

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 282 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 715 OF 2016

¶4

Lalsing Amarsing Barela

¶5

...APPLICANT

¶6

versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra

¶8

...RESPONDENTS

¶9

Mr. P.B. Patil, Advocate for applicant Mr. P.G. Borade, APP for Respondent - State

¶10

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.

¶11

DATED : 23^rd JANUARY, 2017.

¶12

Order :-

¶13

Present application is filed by the applicant-original accused to release him in bail in pending criminal Appeal No. 715 of 2016 filed against impugned judgment and order of the acquittal dated 13-08-2015, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, in Sessions Case No. 63 of 2015. The applicant failed to comply the provisions as contemplated under section 390 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the circumstances, the learned trial court has issued NBW against the applicant - original accused. In response to NBW, the applicant was arrested on 02-01-2017 and has produced before the learned trial court. Thereafter, he was remanded to Magisterial Custody.

¶14

2 Cri.A-282-17

¶15

Considering the attaining circumstances on record, it would not be proper to keep the applicant behind bar pending hearing the appeal. The applicant has already been acquitted for the offences punishable under sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code by the trial court. In case, he is allowed to remain in jail pending appeal it would nothing but an incarceration by way of punishment, pre-hearing of appeal against acquittal.

¶16

In the light of above, the applicant - original accused be released forthwith on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs. 25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety in like amount before the concerned trial court, Dhule.

¶17

The criminal application is allowed in above terms and stands disposed of accordingly.

¶18

The parties to act upon authenticated copy of this order.

¶19

Sd/Sd/-

¶20

[ K. K. SONAWANE, J. [ S.S. SHINDE, J.]

¶21

MTK

Lalsing Amarsing Barela (Pawara) v. the State of Maharashtra.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalsing Amarsing Barela (Pawara) 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

Kanifnath S/O Radhakishan Popalghat Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Girish S/O Upendra Karhade and Other Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Radha @ Ashtha Vitthaql Takaras Vs the State of Mah

Rajendra Karbhari Kale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

The State of Maharashtra Vs Bharat Chandrakant Ghalme and Ors.

Ibrahim Riyaj Bepari and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.