Bench granted bail to two applicants accused of robbery under IPC, holding that after five years of custody with no injury caused and a slow trial, leniency was warranted subject to furnishing bond and sureties.
Applicants released on bail upon furnishing PR bond of Rs.50,000 each with one or two local solvent 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.
1 / 8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1456 OF 2020
K.F. Yunus .... Applicant versus State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.84 OF 2020
Nasir Ahmed Kaleemi .... Applicant versus State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 17th JULY, 2021 (Through video conferencing)
P.C. :
order because they arise out of same investigation and same
offence.
Nesarikar
2 / 8
3 / 8 [email protected]
4 / 8 [email protected]
one customer. Therefore the informant, his cousin Manoj and driver Surendra Chauhan came to Mumbai. They met Likhit @ Nikhit and one person in a hotel. The other person was introduced as Shah. All of them went to Bandra Kurla Trade Centre to verify authenticity of the ruby and to get its certificate of genuineness verified on 19/07/2016. They were returning towards their hotel. At about 07.30 p.m. their car was intercepted by a Xylo vehicle. The passengers in that car got down and told the informant and others that they were police officers and they alleged that the informant was entering into an illegal transaction. The informant, his brother and driver as well as Likhit @ Nikhit and aforementioned Shah were forcibly kept in Xylo vehicle. They told the informant that they were to be taken to Thane Crime Branch. During their travel they removed the ruby and some cash from the informant. Manoj was left near Juinagar. Chauhan was dropped between Belapur and Panvel and the informant was dropped near Vadkhal diversion. The informant realized that he was robbed of his ruby and cash.
5 / 8 [email protected]
Thereafter he lodged his FIR. It was mentioned in the FIR that the ruby was worth Rs.5 lakhs. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that they are languishing in jail nearly for 5 years. The Applicant Yunus was supposed to be the person who was one of members in the meeting, but he has not played any major role. Learned counsel for the Applicants submitted that it is not the allegation of the prosecution that the informant was harmed. She submitted that 5 years is a too long period for such vague allegations and the trial is not likely to get over soon. Therefore their applications be considered sympathetically.
6 / 8
assistance of all the learned counsel and learned APPs I have perused the charge-sheet. The informant had immediately given supplementary statement on 21/07/2016, in which he has stated that the actual price of the ruby was Rs.5 Crores and not Rs.5 lakhs, as mentioned in the FIR. He submitted that the informant’s cousin Manoj had got the valuation done on 07/09/2015 from a Government valuer. He submitted certificate to that effect was given to the police. The charge-sheet further shows that the Applicant and his brother Manoj had identified both the Applicants in different identification parades. The informant had attributed role to Yunus. He has stated that Yunus had met the informant along with Likhit @ Nikhit at Galaxy Hotel, Santacruz and had conducted negotiations. As far as Applicant Nasir is concerned, according to the informant Nasir was with other persons in Xylo car and he had claimed to be a police constable attached to Thane Crime Branch. Similar are the statements of the informant’s cousin Manoj. Learned counsel
7 / 8 [email protected]
for the Applicant Yunus submitted that he was arrested in Bangalore and at the time of his arrest that particular ruby was recovered. It was revalued and the valuation made by the the Government approved valuer at the instance of police was Rs.44,933/-. This certificate is dated 30/12/2016.
8 / 8
O R D E R
(i) In connection with C.R.No.166/2016 registered with BKC Police Station, the Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each, with one or two local solvent sureties each, in the like amount.
(iii) Applications stand disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to applicants accused of robbery after five years of custody when trial is not likely to conclude soon.
Whether the seriousness of the offence and lack of injury warrant denial of bail in view of the delay and inadequate evidence of recovery.
Whether the applicants can be released on bail upon furnishing sureties and PR bond despite the gravity of the charges.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.F. Yunus
Nasir Ahmed Kaleemi
State of Maharashtra
SANGAR V. KOTWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
