Dismissed

Ravikant Chandrakant Jati v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC6 Feb 2017BA/301/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay considered a bail application for an accused charged with grievous hurt and attempted murder. The application was rejected as the police investigation was still ongoing and the charge sheet had not been filed.

What did the court decide?

Bail application of the applicant rejected. He remains in custody pending completion of investigation and filing of the charge sheet.

Ravikant Chandrakant Jati Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

8.BA301_2017.doc

¶2

Vidya Amin

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION No. 301 OF 2017

¶5

Ravikant Chandrakant Jati Vs.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra

¶7

... Applicant ... Respondent

¶8

Mr. Vikrant V. Phatate, Advocate for the Applicant Ms. Sharmila S. Kaushik, APP for Respondent – State. Mr. R.G. Sangle, P.S.I., Vijapur Naka Police Station, Solapur City present.

¶9

CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: 6^th February, 2017.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

This Application is filed by the applicant/accused for bail. One

¶12

Deepak Namdeo Chavan knew the father of the applicant/accused and has earlier borrowed Rs.50,000/- from the applicant/accused and though he had returned him total Rs.2 lakhs, still the applicant/accused claimed that his principal amount of Rs.50,000/- was not paid and, therefore, he used to demand the said amount. He met the complainant on 3^rd December, 2016 in the evening to go to bank and at that time, suddenly applicant/accused stabbed him at multiple places with knife. The complainant fell down and thereafter 2 to 3 persons took him to police station. He was sent to Civil Hospital, Solapur and treated. Thereafter on 5^th December, 2016 the statement of complainant was recorded, pursuant to which the police registered offence at C.R. No. 555 of 2016 with Vijapur Naka Police Station under sections 326 of Indian Penal code and

¶13

1 / 2

¶14

8.BA301_2017.doc

¶15

subsequently Section 307 of Indian Penal Code was applied. The applicant/accused was arrested on 5^th December, 2016. Hence, this Bail Application.

¶16

The learned counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that the applicant/accused is innocent. He has not committed any offence under section 307 or 326 of Indian Penal Code. The applicant is in prison since last two months and therefore, he be released on bail.

¶17

Learned APP while opposing the Bail Application relied on the FIR and the statements of other witnesses so also the injury certificate of the complainant Deepak Chavan.

¶18

Perused the FIR, medical certificate issued on 30^th January, 2017 which discloses that the complainant was admitted in the hospital and examined on 3^rd December, 2016 at around 9.15 p.m. The incident of assault has taken place at around 8.30 p.m. The certificate discloses that there were 10 stab injuries, out of which, 6 injuries were grievous on neck, stomach and on scapula region. Still the police are investigating the matter. The charge sheet is not yet filed. Hence, at this stage, Bail Application is rejected.

¶19

(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶20

2 / 2

Ravikant Chandrakant Jati v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravikant Chandrakant Jati 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

Kashinath Kisan Deokate Vs the State of Maharashtra

Laxman Tukaram Nimbalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yogiraj Vishwanath Murhe Vs the State of Maharashtra

Inayat Abdul Majid Hurjuk Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahesh Malkappa Pujari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nilesh Pandurang Sutar Vs the State of Maharashtra