Allowed

Jignesh Naresh Parmar v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Jul 2023BA/1453/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant accused of s.392 IPC (grievous hurt). Noting a three-year delay in charge framing and injury evidence suggesting simple injuries rather than attempt to murder, the court released him on bond with sureties and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000 with one or two sureties of like amount.

Jignesh Naresh Parmar Vs State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1/3 2 BA 153-23.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1453 OF 2023 Jignesh Naresh Parmar .. Applicant

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶5

Mr. Sudeep Pasbola with Mr. Ayush Pasbola for the applicant. Ms. Pallavi Dabholkar, APP for the State. PSI N.V. Chandramore from Mulund police station.

¶6

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 3^rd JULY, 2023

¶7

P.C:-

¶8

1 In furtherance of the previous order, where the learned APP was asked to find out the antecedents of the applicant, she would press into service C.R.No.228/2018, registered with Mulund police station which is invoked u/s.392 r/w section 34 of the IPC.

¶9

2 The second Bail Application is preferred in the wake of the delay in framing of the charge, as it can be seen that the first application was withdrawn on 20/8/2022, with liberty to renew the request for being released on bail, in case if the charge is not framed within a period of six months. Admittedly, the charge is not framed and hence, liberty has been availed by filing second Bail Application.

¶10

3 With the able assistance of Mr.Pasbola as well as the

¶11

Tilak

¶12

2/3 2 BA 153-23.doc

¶13

learned APP, I have perused the charge-sheet placed on record.

¶14

Admittedly, the applicant is the author of the injuries that are indicated in the injury certificate issued by MCGM Hospital at Mulund (West) Mumbai, reflecting the injuries upon the complainant/victim. The nature of injuries as indicated in the penultimate column, reflect as being ‘simple injuries’ caused by pointed and blunt object and necessarily, the injury certificate matches with the version of the prosecution case, that on being perturbed, the applicant assaulted the victim by means of a poker. Except injury no.3 which is on the head, the placement of other injuries prima facie would not indicate the intention to eliminate the victim or cause his death, thereby attracting offence punishable u/s.307 of the IPC.

¶15

In any case, the applicant would face the consequences of the accusations levelled against him when he faces the trial.

¶16

He has been incarcerated since 19/10/2020 pursuant to the offence being registered on 18/10/2020 and since with almost three years having passed, the charge is not yet framed.

¶17

Hence, I deem it appropriate to secure his liberty by releasing him on bail subject to the condition that he shall not indulge into any offence while he is on bail and in case of any such contingency, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. Hence, the following order :-

Tilak

3/3 2 BA 153-23.doc

O R D E R

(a) The Applicant – Jignesh Naresh Parmar in connection with C.R.No.673/2020 registered with Mulund Police Station shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.25,000/with one or two sureties of the like amount.

¶22

(b) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer. The Applicant should not tamper with evidence.

¶23

¶24

(d)On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, if there is any change.

¶25

The Application is allowed in the aforestated terms.

¶26

( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶27

Tilak

Jignesh Naresh Parmar v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jignesh Naresh Parmar v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sulab @ Shiv Bacchan Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shankar Hanumant Malusare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ice STEEL1 Private Limited vs L and T Mhi Boilers Private Limited Limited

Sheil Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dani Wooltex Corporation and Ors.

Peter Rodrigues vs Sanjay Wasan

Goregaon Ambika Co. Operative Housing Society Limited vs Sahajanand Developers Proprietorship Concern of Mr Jeetendra Brahmabhatt