Allowed

Yogesh Devram Goykar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC16 Dec 2019BA/1712/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge bail application where the applicant, arrested in connection with an FIR involving robbery, cheating, and weapons offences, sought release. The court, noting no mention of coercive interrogation, lack of identification parade, and release of co-accused, granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties of like amount.

Yogesh Devram Goykar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2019)

1 of 3

Sajakali Jamadar

8-ba-1712-19.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1712 OF 2019

¶6

Yogesh Devram Goykar

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶10

Mr. S. B. Shetye i/b Ms. Priyanka H. Chavan, Advocate for the
Applicant.
Mr. S. H. Yadav, APP for the State-Respondent.

¶11

CORAM :PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 16th December, 2019

¶12

PC :

¶13

1.The applicant is arrested on 30th January, 2019 in connection
with C.R. No. 99 of 2019 registered with Chakan Police Station
Pimpari-Chinchwad, Dist. Pune for offences punishable under
Sections 395 & 341 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 r/w Section
25 of Indian Arms Act and under Section 135 of Maharashtra Police
Act.

¶14

2.The FIR is lodged on 13th January, 2019 by one
Rinku Ramkumar Prajapati. He has stated that on 12th January,
2019 at about 10.30 p.m. he and his associates Krushna Murari
Rajendrakumar were travelling in their Bolero jeep. They wereat
Chakan Talegaon road. At that time, they were obstructed by white
Swift car. The number of the car was MH14DX8785. Four persons got

¶15

2 of 3 8-ba-1712-19.doc

¶16

Sajakali Jamadar

¶17

down from the car. They opened the doors of the informant's Bolero car. The informant and his friend were slapped. They were shown sharp weapon like knife. The culprits took Rs.6,000/ and mobile phone from the first informant, Krushna Murari Rajendrakumar thereafter they went with taking Bolero jeep. The FIR was lodged. Description of the offenders was mentioned in the FIR .

¶18

3.Investigation was carried out. The Applicant was
arrested on 13th January, 2019 and since then he is in custody.

¶19

4.Undisputedly, no Test Identification Parade was conducted.
Charge-sheet is filed on 9th April, 2019. There is no recovery from the
applicant. The accused Aarif Naikwade has been granted bail by this
Court by order dated 26th August, 2019 passed in Bail Application
No. 1702 of 2019. Subsequently, the other accused Ganesh Bhaskar
Wable was granted bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khed-
Rajgurunagar, Dist. Pune by order 7th November, 2019. Investigation
is completed and charge-sheet is filed. Applicant is in custody from
the date of arrest. Considering the aforesaid circumstances bail can
be granted to the applicant.

¶20

5. Hence, I pass the following order.

3 of 3

Sajakali Jamadar

8-ba-1712-19.doc

O R D E R

i)The applicant is directed to be released on bail in
connection with C.R. No.99 of 2019 registered
with Chakan Police Station Pimpari-Chinchwad,
Dist. Pune on his furnishing P.R. bond in the sum
of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the
like amount;

¶26

ii)Bail Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶27

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Yogesh Devram Goykar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh Devram Goykar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxman Tukaram Dhawade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ravindra Baburao Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sandeep Mahesh Pokharkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mukesh Anil Magar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shubham Rajendra Taras Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shaikh Hassan Shaikh Abdul Khalik Ali Vs the State of Maharashtra