Allowed

Prashant @ Prasanna Najunda Gowda v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Jun 2018BA/373/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 CrPC for offences of forgery and human trafficking, the Bombay High Court held that the evidence against the applicant was silent regarding the mobile phone and prima facie no other material existed against him, granting bail.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a PR bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two solvent local sureties in the like amount.

Prashant @ Prasanna Najunda Gowda Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

47-ba373.18.sxw

¶2

ssm 1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 373 OF 2018

¶6

Prashant @ Prasanna Najunda Gowda ….Applicant.

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra ….Respondent.

¶9

Mr. S.G. Rajput for the Applicant. Smt. Rutuja Ambekar APP, for the Respondent-State.

¶10

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 25^th JUNE, 2018.

¶11

P.C.:-

¶12

This is an Application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for bail in CR No. 326 of 2017 dated 24^th October,

¶13

2017 registered with Sahar Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 370, 465, 468, 471, 419, 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

2 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Applicant and the learned APP. Perused the charge sheet.

¶15

3 The Applicant is accused No.3 in the present crime.

¶16

It is the prosecution case that, the Applicant in connivance

¶17

with other accused persons prepared forged and fabricated documents

¶18

and submitted it with the passport office, Mumbai and on the basis of

¶19

1/3

¶20

ssm 2 47-ba373.18.sxw

¶21

the said documents, sent certain children to foreign countries thereby, committing an act of human trafficking.

¶22

During the course of investigation, the Applicant came to be arrested on 22^nd November 2017 and after completion of the investigation, the police have submitted charge sheet.

¶23

4 The evidence, against the Applicant, as propounded by the prosecuting agency is that, the Applicant was in contact with the co accused Modi on his mobile phone. The material available on record is silent about the fact that the Applicant was in fact in use and possession of the mobile phone bearing No. 9930829299. Apart from the said fact, prima facie, it appears that, there is no other material available on record against the Applicant.

¶24

5 In view of the above, the Applicant can be released on bail.

¶25

Hence, the following order.

¶26

a) The Applicant be released on bail in CR No. 326 of 2017, registered with Sahar Police Station, Mumbai

¶27

on his furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one

¶28

or two solvent local sureties in the like amount.

¶29

b) After his release from Jail, the Applicant shall

2/3

47-ba373.18.sxw

ssm 3

attend the Sahar Police Station on every first

¶34

Monday of the month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00

¶35

p.m.

¶36

c) The Applicant shall attend all the dates before the Trial Court unless precluded for medical reasons.

¶37

d) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶38

6 Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

¶39

3/3

Prashant @ Prasanna Najunda Gowda v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant @ Prasanna Najunda Gowda 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

Vikas Ramnaresh Mishra Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahendra Bhopalsingh Mehta Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anil Malhar Zite Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shashikesh Hawaldar Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kumar Nambi Tewar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ganpat Bhursingh Purohit and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra