Allowed

Ramesh Somnath Patankar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC30 Jul 2018BA/1446/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay allowed a bail application filed by Ramesh Somnath Patankar under Section 439 CrPC. The court granted bail by applying the doctrine of parity after noting that a principal accused had already been enlarged on bail, despite procedural irregularities regarding a confession.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was enlarged on bail on furnishing a Personal Security Bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount.

Ramesh Somnath Patankar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

ba1446.2018.doc

¶2

1/3

¶3

Dusane

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1446 OF 2018

¶6

Ramesh Somnath Patankar Vs .	....	Applicant
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.	....	Respondents

¶7

Mr. Mandar Mahesh Goswami for the Applicant. Mr. S.S. Pednekar, APP for the State.

¶8

Coram : Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav , J. Date : 30^th July, 2018

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1 Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP.

¶11

2 This is an application under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant herein is arrested on 29^th November 2015 in Crime No.19 of 2015, registered at Wadivarhe Police Station, Nashik, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(i)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) and 3(5) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999. The investigation is completed and the charge-sheet is filed.

¶12

2/3 1. ba1446.2018.doc

¶13

Dusane

¶14

3 It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant herein

¶15

was working as a Manager in the godown of the principal accused Sampat Namdeo Ghorpade, who has been enlarged on bail.

¶16

4 Learned APP submits that there is a confession of the present applicant under Section 18 of the MCOC Act and on the first given opportunity, the said statement has been retracted. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submits that in fact procedure for recording of the confession was not followed and in any case, it was confession of the co-accused.

¶17

5 Be that as it may, taking into consideration the facts of

¶18

the case and by virtue of doctrine of parity coupled with the fact that Sampat Ghorpade is enlarged on bail, the applicant also deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶19

6 The observations are prima facie in nature and shall not be considered for discharge application or at the time of trial. Hence, the order :

¶20

Dusane

¶21

3/3

¶22

ba1446.2018.doc

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

i ) The application is allowed.

¶25

ii ) The applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount.

¶26

( Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav , J)

Ramesh Somnath Patankar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Somnath Patankar 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

Sanjay Bhagwat Nikumbh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Umaji Ganpat Madane Vs the State of Maharashtar

Sachin Bharat Tiwade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Balkrushna Sopan Bhorkade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Magan @ Madan Ratan Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vasant Mahadev Ghadi Vs the State of Maharashtra