In a bail application under Section 302 IPC where the accused has antecedents for a similar offence, the Court rejected the bail plea stating the case was not fit for enlargement.
Application rejected. Trial expedited; liberty granted to file fresh application if trial does not commence within nine months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BA 802-2019.doc
Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 802 OF 2019
Akshaya @ Bokya Sanjay Jawale .Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra .Respondent
Mr. Govind B. Solanke, Advocate, for the Applicant Mrs. P. P. Shinde, APP, for the Respondent – State Mr. P. M. Shinde, Head Constable, Kalyan Taluka Police Station present
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 26.07.2019
P.C.
. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
bail in connection with C. R. No. I-356 of 2018 registered with the Kalyan Taluka Police Station, Thane (Rural), for the alleged offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
place on 17.09.1998. The complaint is lodged by the father of the deceased – Faiyaz i. e. by Alam @ Guddu Mehandi Hasan. According
1 of 3
BA 802-2019.doc
to the eye witness – Ravindra @ Pappu Ramsingh Jaiswar, he was present with the deceased – Faiyaz when the incident took place. He has set out in detail how there was a quarrel between Faiyaz and his cousin – Shabaj Riyaz Khan and that after the said incident at about 11.00 p. m., when he and Faiyaz were near the Gaondevi Mandir, a motor cycle came and that co-accused – Golu and his friend came alongwith Shabaj Khan. He has stated that co-accused – Shabaj Khan told co-accused – Golu and his friend that these were the persons i. e. Faiyaz and Ravindra had assaulted him, pursuant to which Golu's two friends ( including the Applicant ) assaulted him and the deceased. He has further stated that the said two persons i. e. the present Applicant held Faiyaz and co-accused – Golu assaulted him with a sharp weapon on his neck, pursuant to which Faiyaz fell on the ground. Faiyaz was taken to the hospital, however, before admission, he was declared dead. The statement of Alam @ Guddu is also recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and he re-iterates the same. The Applicant has one antecedent i.e. case registered with the Kalyan Taluka Police Station ( C. R. No. 21 of 2018 ) under Sections 325, 341, 324, 323, 506, 142, 144 of the Indian Penal Code.
2 of 3
BA 802-2019.doc
the Applicant on bail. Hence, the Application stands rejected. However, the trial of the Applicant is expedited. If for no fault of the Applicant the trial does not commence within a period of nine months, the Applicant is granted liberty to file a fresh Application which will be considered on its own merits.
(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)
3 of 3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the accused in a murder trial with antecedents is entitled to bail.
Whether the trial can be expedited given the delay since the occurrence.
The conditions under which a fresh bail application may be entertained if trial is delayed.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Akshaya @ Bokya Sanjay Jawale
The State of Maharashtra
Revati Mohite Dere
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
