Allowed

Devraj Pavitrakumar Nair v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC5 Oct 2023BA/1226/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Bail Application under Section 437 and 439 CrPC allowed. The High Court applied Section 437 and 439 CrPC. The Applicant sought bail in a case involving offences under Sections 307, 326, 324, 504 and 506(2) IPC. Considering the simple nature of injuries and completion of investigation with charge-sheet filed, the High Court allowed bail on furnishing a personal bond and sureties with condi

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000 with one or two sureties in the like amount, with conditions for monthly police attendance and non-interference with evidence/witnesses.

Devraj Pavitrakumar Nair Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

22-ba-1226-2022.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1226 OF 2022

¶4

Devraj Pavitrakumar Nair

¶5

…Applicant

¶6

V/s.

¶7

State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶8

Mr.Sanjay Singh, for the Applicant. Mr.Y.Y. Dabke, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr.B.V. Gaonkar, PSI, Amboli Police Station.

¶9

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶10

DATE : 5^th OCTOBER 2023

¶11

P.C:-

¶12

. By this Application, Applicant is seeking bail in

¶13

Crime No.756 of 2021 registered with Amboli Police Station, Mumbai, for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 326, 324,, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’ for short). 2. It is prosecution’s case that, on 1^st December 2021 at about 6.00 p.m. the Applicant came to the grocery shop of the

¶14

first informant and demanded blade, as there was rush, so the first

¶15

N.S. Kamble page 1 of 4

¶16

22-ba-1226-2022.doc

¶17

informant asked the Applicant to wait for sometime. Then Applicant got angry and he left the shop and came after sometime and assaulted first informant with blade on his neck and other parts of the body. When first informant’s son tried to intervene, the Applicant also assaulted him with blade.

¶18

It is contention of the learned counsel for the Applicant that, all the injuries caused to the first informant and his son were simple in nature, they were not life threatening. Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. Applicant is behind bar about 22 months. Hence, requested to allow the Application.

¶19

It is contention of the learned APP that, Applicant had assaulted with blade on neck and other parts of the body of the first informant with an intention to kill him. There is prima facie case against the Applicant. Hence, requested to reject the Application.

¶20

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused FIR and charge-sheet.

¶21

N.S. Kamble page 2 of 4

¶22

22-ba-1226-2022.doc

¶23

The Medical Certificate shows that, the nature of

¶24

injuries caused to the first informant and his son are simple in nature. The Applicant is behind bar about 22 months. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. Considering this fact, I am inclined to allow the Application and I pass following order.

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(i) The Applicant be released on bail in Crime No.756 of 2021 registered with Amboli Police Station, Mumbai on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶27

(ii) After his release from jail the Applicant shall attend the Amboli Police Station, Mumbai once in a month i.e. on every 1^st Monday of the month between 11.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. till framing of charge.

¶28

(iii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.

¶29

N.S. Kamble page 3 of 4

¶30

22-ba-1226-2022.doc

¶31

(iv) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶32

(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

¶33

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶34

Digitally signed NILAM by NILAMSANTOSH SANTOSH KAMBLE KAMBLE Date:2023.10.10 18:14:04 +0530

¶35

N.S. Kamble page 4 of 4

Devraj Pavitrakumar Nair v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devraj Pavitrakumar Nair v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Niyaz Ali Mamorge Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Siraj Sarwar Idriishi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suraj @ Shivdya Ramdas Shinde Vs State of Maharashtra

Lakhan @ Lakhya Sambhaji @ Shahaji Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Samadhan Pitambar Tavde Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mannukumar Manoj Singh Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.