High Court of Bombay (Criminal) heard application under Section 439 CrPC for bail. Court applied doctrine of parity as co-accused was on bail. Application allowed.
Applicant enlarged on bail on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 25,000 and one or more sureties in like amount.
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.
10.ba1071.2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1071 OF 2021
Ajay Anand Kudake...Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra.…Respondents.
Mr. S.P. Parulekar, advocate for applicant.
Ms. P.P. Shinde, APP for State.
CORAM :SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV.
DATE:APRIL 19, 2021.
P.C.
1Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant through video
conferencing and learned APP for State.
2This is an application under section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant is seeking enlargement on
bail in C.R. No. 480 of 2019 registered at Yerwada Police Station, Pune
on 3/7/2019 for the offence punishable under section 307, 323, 504,
143, 147, 148, 149 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The
1 of 4
Talwalkar
10.ba1071.2021.doc
applicant herein has been shown as arrested on 15/7/2019.
3The first informant happens to be the Superintendent of
Yerwada Central Prison. On 3/7/2019 he lodged a report at the police
station alleging therein that at about 6.30 a.m. on 3/11/2019 there
was a quarrel amongst inmates of Yerwada Central Prison. The
applicant was in custody in Sessions Case No. 134 of 2017 registered
at Chaturshrungi Police Station, Pune for offence punishable under
section 307, 326, 449, 504 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, under section 2(25) of the Arms Act and under section 37(1)
read with section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. It is alleged that while
in prison, Mohd. Jamal Nadaf was attacked by Ganesh, Mangesh,
Tushar, Deepak and the present applicant. The First Informant has
attributed specific overt act to each of the accused. Learned APP
submits that the investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed in
CrimeNo.480of2019.
4Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that although
there are criminal antecedents, the applicant has been acquitted in
most of the cases, especially in Sessions Case No. 134 of 2017, for
2 of 4
Talwalkar
10.ba1071.2021.doc
which he was in prison. It is also submitted that the injured had
sustained only one grievious injury and the other injuries were in the
nature of contusions and lacerated wounds. The learned Counsel
submits that similar allegations were levelled against co-accused
Shwetang Nikalje and that he has been enlarged on bail by this Court
(Coram : Sarang V. Kotwal, J) vide order dated 8/2/2021. The
applicant is lodged in Yerwada Central Prison even today.
5Considering the nature of allegations and by virtue of
doctrine of parity, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Hence, following order is passed :
ORDER
(i)The application is allowed.
(ii)The applicant is directed to be enlarged on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- and one or more
sureties in the like amount.
(iii)The applicant shall report to the Yerwada Police Station on
every Monday till framing of charge.
(iv)The application is disposed of accordingly.
3 of 4
Talwalkar
10.ba1071.2021.doc
(SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J)
4 of 4
Talwalkar
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail in view of the doctrine of parity.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
(Coram : Sarang V. Kotwal, J) vide order dated 8/2/2021Referred¶3
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajay Anand Kudake
State of Maharashtra
Sadhana S. Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court