The High Court at Bombay granted bail to the applicant accused of conspiracy in a gold shop robbery. The judge held that material evidence linking the applicant to the crime was insufficient to justify detention.
Released on bail on furnishing ₹50,000 PR bond with two local solvent sureties.
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.
29-BA-533-20.odt
1 / 6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.533 OF 2020
Mahipal Dudharam Jat .... Applicant versus State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 24th MARCH, 2021
P.C. :
unknown persons came to a jweller’s shop known as ‘Punekar
Nesarikar
2 / 6 29-BA-533-20.odt
Jwellers’. One of them waited outside. Four persons went inside. One of them was holding a pistol. He fired at the informant. They robbed gold ornaments weighing about 3005.445 gms. They also took away CCTV DVR. The total value of the stolen articles was Rs.90,15,000/-. According to the prosecution case, the accused had come on two motorcycles. Those were also stolen motorcycles. The allegations against the present Applicant are that the Applicant was residing at Pune since past many days. Accused No.1 Subhash Bishnoi and his four associates came in contact with the present Applicant. It is alleged that the accused No.1 Subhash was in touch with the present Applicant. It is alleged that the Applicant was one of the conspirators in commission of this offence. There was recovery of 50 gms of golden ornaments at his instance. The Applicant was arrested on 11/04/2019 and since then he is in custody. The investigation is over and the charge-sheet is filed.
3 / 6 29-BA-533-20.odt
shown to the informant or his employees and therefore the ornaments cannot be connected to the present offence. He submitted that even from the prosecution case, the Applicant was not at the spot. The actual robbery was committed by the other accused. The Applicant is roped in as a conspirator and for that also there is no evidence against him. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant is ready to furnish local solvent sureties.
assistance of both the learned counsel I have perused the charge-sheet. The FIR is lodged by Divyank Pradip Mehta, who was the owner of Punekar Jwellers. He has described the incident which is narrated above. He has given description of the offenders, who had entered his shop. His story is supported by
4 / 6 29-BA-533-20.odt
his employee Monali Navnath Kandhare. The informant had also suffered injuries. Therefore the occurrence of the incident cannot be doubted. As far as identity of the present Applicant is concerned, it is not even the prosecution case that the Applicant was one of the five persons, who had committed actual robbery in that shop. The Applicant was not put in Test Identification Parade to enable the informant and his employee to identify him.
5 / 6 29-BA-533-20.odt
As far as present Applicant is concerned these statements do not form any serious incriminating material against the Applicant.
O R D E R
(i) In connection with C.R.No.373/2019 registered with Wakad Police Station, Pune, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
29-BA-533-20.odt
6 / 6
Thousand Only) with two local solvent sureties in the like amount.
(iii) Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail in connection with an offence underSections 395, 397, 504, 427, 120(B) IPC, Indian Arms Act, andMaharashtra Police Act.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Mahipal Dudharam Jat
State of Maharashtra
SARANG V. KOTWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
