Allowed

Rameshwar Janglya Bhosale v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Mar 2023BA/451/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Aurangabad allowed the bail application of an accused arraigned on the sole statement of a co-accused. The court held that as nothing was recovered at his instance and his involvement in the present crime appeared probable given his antecedents, the application deserved to be allowed.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on executing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.50,000 with one solvent surety subject to monthly police attendance and not tampering with witnesses.

Rameshwar Janglya Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

937-ba-451-2023.odt

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.451 OF 2023

¶5

RAMESHWAR JANGLYA BHOSALE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶6

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Gaikwad Satish A.
APP for Respondent/State : Mr. K.S. Patil

¶7

CORAM : S.G. MEHARE, J.

¶8

 DATED : MARCH 24, 2023

¶9

PER COURT:-

¶10

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP

¶11

for the State.

¶12

2.The applicant has been arraigned as an accused on the
sole statement of the co-accused. Nothing is recovered at his
instance.

¶13

3.Learned counsel for the applicant would argue that he
did not know about the present crime registered against him. The
procedure under Section 84 of Cr.P.C. was not followed. He did not
abscond. He was arraigned as an accused as earlier crimes were at
his discredit.

¶14

4.Learned APP would argue that there are antecedents to
the discredit of the applicant. He was repeatedly involved in the
similar crime. In such circumstances, the statement of the co-accused
is relevant to believe the prosecution case at this stage.

¶15

937-ba-451-2023.odt
(2)

¶16

5.The statement of the co-accused under police custody is
immaterial. Nothing has been recovered from him. The stand taken
by the learned counsel for the applicant of involving him in the
present crime as he was the accused in similar crime, appears
probable. The charge sheet has also been filed. In the facts of the
case, the application deserve to be allowed. Hence, the following
order :

¶17

ORDER

¶18

(i)Bail Application is allowed.

¶19

(ii)The applicant, Rameshwar Janglya Bhosale, be released on bail
on executing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with
one solvent surety in the like amount in connection with Crime No.81
of 2017, registered with Pachod Police Station, District Aurangabad
for the offence punishable under Section 394, 511 read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/25 of Indian Arms Act, on
the conditions that he shall not tamper with the prosecution
witnesses.

¶20

(iii)The applicant shall attend the concerned police station on last
friday of each month between 06.00 pm to 08.00 pm for six months
from the date of his release.

¶21

 (S.G. MEHARE, J.)

¶22

Mujaheed//

Rameshwar Janglya Bhosale v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rameshwar Janglya Bhosale 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Khalil Shaikh Ismail @ Mohd. Khalil Mohd. Ismail Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahadu @ Madhav Govind Kale and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra

Subhash Mahadu Mahajan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Purushottam Tukarma Surnar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Laxman @ Raju Namdeo Paul Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shubhangi W/O. Shivraj Dharne Vs Shivraj S/O. Gurupadappa Dharne and Others