Allowed

Sangeeta Vijay Nair v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC28 Mar 2023BA/663/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of Sangeeta Nair, wife of an accused gang leader. Finding no prima facie material linking her to the crime syndicate beyond incidental allegations regarding a SIM card and gold sale application orders her release on cash bail with conditions to report and furnish bonds, overriding Section 21(4) rigors.

What did the court decide?

Applicant granted bail on cash bond of Rs. 30,000 for six weeks with conditions to submit police report, furnish PR bond, report monthly, and not interfere with witnesses.

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

¶1

24 ba 663-22.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 663 OF 2022

Sangeeta Nair

..Applicant

v/s.

The State of Maharashtra .

¶8

..Respondents

¶9

Mr. Niranjan Mundargi a/w. Mr. Keral Mehta i/b. Mr. Pradeep Singh for the Applicant.

¶10

Mr. S.V.Gavand, APP for the State. Mr. U.G.Angre , Head Constable from Kalachowky P.Stn.

¶11

CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : 28^th MARCH, 2023.

¶12

P.C.

¶13

At the outset, learned Counsel for the Applicant seeks leave to

¶14

amend the prayer clause as to incorporate the Special Case number in the prayer clause. Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

¶15

This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the

¶16

aforesaid Applicant, who is facing trial in MCOC Special Case No.14 of 2019 pending before the Sessions Court, Gr. Mumbai, arising from FIR No. 70 of 2019 registered at Kalachowky Police

¶17

PRASANNA P SALGAONKAR

¶18

Station, for the offences punishable under Section 341, 395, 397,

¶19

Digitally signed by PRASANNA P SALGAONKAR Date: 2023.03.30 15:56:54 +0530

1 of 4

pps

24 ba 663-22.doc

412, 201 r/w. 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act, 1999 and under Section 37(1)(A) r/w. 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

¶24

Shri Nirajnan Mundargi, learned Counsel for the Applicant states that there is no prima facie material to show the involvement of the Applicant. The only allegation against the Applicant is that she is the wife of the Accused No.1 who is a Gang leader and that she had procured sim card for the co-accused, and had accompanied her husband to sell the gold. Shri Mundargi states that there is no admissible evidence against this Applicant, who is in custody since 04.06.2021.

¶25

Learned APP objects to the application on the ground that there is prima facie material to show involvement of the Applicant in the crime. I have perused the records and considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsels for the respective parties.

¶26

The Applicant herein is the wife of the Accused No.1 who is stated to be a gang leader. The only accusation against the

2 of 4

pps

24 ba 663-22.doc

Applicant is that she had procured sim card for the co-accused and that she had accompanied her husband to a goldsmith to sell the gold. Apart from the statement of the co-accused, there is no prima facie material on record to indicate that the Applicant is a member of crime syndicate headed by her husband. Hence, there is no impediment to grant bail despite rigor of Section 21(4) of the MCOC Act. The Applicant is in custody since June 2021. Till date charge is not framed. There is no possibility of the trial commencing or being concluded in the immediate future.

¶31

Considering the above facts and circumstances, in my considered view, this is a fit case for releasing the accused on bail. Hence, the order:-

¶32

(i) The application is allowed;

¶33

(ii) The Applicant-Sangeeta Nair, who is facing trial in MCOC Special Case No.14 of 2019 pending before the Sessions Court, Gr. Mumbai, be released on cash bail in the sum of of Rs.30,000/(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) for a period of six weeks. (iii) The Applicant shall, within the said period of six weeks

3 of 4

pps

24 ba 663-22.doc

furnish P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or more sureties in the like amount;

¶38

(iv) The Applicant shall report to the police station on first day of every month between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. from April, 2023 till the charge is framed;

¶39

(v) The Applicant shall not interfere with the complainant or the other witnesses, or tamper with the evidence in any manner;

¶40

(vi) The Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of her permanent as well as temporary address, if any, and her contact details, and/or change of residence or mobile details from time to time.

¶41

. Application stands disposed of.

¶42

(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

¶43

4 of 4

¶44

pps

Sangeeta Vijay Nair v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangeeta Vijay 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Afzal Haji Khan Vs State of Maharashtra

Rajendra Pandit Suryavanshi and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra

Sanjay Victor Dsouza Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mangal Bhimrao Talekar and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra

Ashok Kedarmal Sharma Vs State of Maharashtra

Umesh Narayan Dhanurkar Vs State of Maharashtra