Allowed

Vishal Ramkrishna Sangale v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC7 Jun 2019APPA/514/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application by an engineering student accused of attacking a deceased with a sickle allegedly out of love三角形 for his sister, the High Court released him on bail due to material weaknesses in prosecution evidence.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail upon furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties in equal amount and complying with specified conditions.

Vishal Ramkrishna Sangale Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1 appa-514.19 .docx

¶2

pmw

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.514 OF 2019 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.392 OF 2019

¶6

Vishal Ramkrishna Sangale … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶7

Mr. S.V. Marwadi for the Applicant.

¶8

Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for the Respondent.

¶9

Mr. T.S. Chaudhari, Head Constable/208 – MIDC Sinnar Police Station, Nashik.

¶10

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 7^th JUNE, 2019.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned APP. Applicant at the relevant time was an engineering student taking education in third year. It is claimed that he attacked deceased with sickle because of alleged love affair of deceased with his sister.

¶13

2 Eye witness PW-4 Shyam relied upon by prosecution claims that he has seen the attack and he informed about it to father Tukaram of deceased. Tukaram thereafter went to police station and lodged report.

¶14

1 of 3

¶15

2 appa-514.19 .docx

¶16

Tukaram (PW-3) also deposed accordingly. However, name of eye witness is not mentioned in his report and there is no explanation therefor.

¶17

3 PW-4 eye witness claims that he was called by police and he has shown spot to police. He also met police in Hospital where deceased was taken and police inquired with him. However, his statement was not recorded and he was also not taken to police station. Thus, on the date of incident i.e. 13^th October 2017 his name did not figure. His statement under section 164 is recorded on 16^th October 2017. The panch on recovery panchanama of weapons have turned hostile. The clothes of accused are claimed to be seized but then there is no C.A. report available on it.

¶18

4 We are therefore inclined to release him on bail.

¶19

5 The applicant shall be released on bail on following terms and conditions :-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties in the like amount;

¶21

(ii) Applicant-accused shall however report to the Superintendent/Registrar of the trial Court on 1^st day of month after every two months;

¶22

(iii) He shall also furnish the address at which he shall be always available and so also furnish his contact numbers;

¶23

2 of 3

¶24

3 appa-514.19 .docx

¶25

(iv) Similar details in relation to his sureties shall also be furnished;

¶26

(v) Vakalatnama of advocate shall be kept alive and valid during pendency of appeal;

¶27

(vi) He shall not claim any fresh notice for final hearing.

¶28

(SMT. SWAPNA JOSHI, J.)

¶29

(B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶30

3 of 3

Vishal Ramkrishna Sangale v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Ramkrishna Sangale 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Mohd. Sabbir Bhikan Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rohan Vilas Waghchaure Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vijay Maruti Dhamdhere Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rahul Gajanan Tumbada Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kailas Suresh Waghmare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pravin @ Sonya Sanjay Algude and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra