Successive anticipatory bail application by applicant under Section 438 CrPC. Applicant claimed completion of road and toilet work as change in circumstances. Court found no material change in circumstances and dismissed the application.
Application dismissed on ground of no material change in circumstances.
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
910- ABA-314-23 (copy).odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.314 OF 2023
SANDEEP CHANDRABHAN NIKAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. A.R. Tapse
APP for Respondent: Mr. S. P. Deshmukh
CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.
DATE : 07.06.2023
PER COURT :
1.Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned
A.P.P for the respondent State.
2. The learned A.P.P argued that the applicant is still absconding and the charge sheet is not filed against him.
3.This is a successive bail application of the applicant for bail under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime No. 72 of 2022,
registered with Police Station Bodwad Taluka Bodwad District Jalgaon for
the offences punishable under Sections 420,419,409, 467, 468, 469, 471
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. The earlier bail application of the applicant was dismissed discussing each and every point raised by the applicant and examining the record. Now
2
910- ABA-314-23 (copy).odt
the learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the allegation that
the construction work of road was incomplete is incorrect. In fact, the
construction of work was completed and this aspect is a change in the
circumstances. There is evidence that the toilet work was also completed
and Co-ordinator has visited the work place and thereafter sanctioned the
amount. The beneficiaries are using the toilet.
5. The applicant has raised as many as 19 grounds seeking bail. It
appears that it is like a bail application afresh. Law is settled that in the
successive bail application, the applicant has to satisfy the material change in
the circumstances that entitle him for bail. However, the ground raised by
the applicant appears not in proposition of the law. Be that as it may, in the
earlier order each and every aspect was considered. It was observed
specifically that huge money was transferred in the personal account of the
applicant and the material placed before the Court was within the
knowledge of the applicant. And the bail was declined. After considering the
argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, the Court did
not find any change in the circumstances. Therefore, the application stands
dismissed.
ysk/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant has established material change in circumstances to justify granting anticipatory bail in a successive application.
Whether the completion of construction work constitutes a change in circumstances warranting bail under Section 438 CrPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sandeep Chandrabhan Nikam
The State of Maharashtra
S. G. Mehare
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court