Allowed

Mukesh @ Chayti Kishor Taywade v. State of Maharashtra, Thorigh Police Station Officer, Police Station, Sonegaon, Nagpur

Bombay HC30 Apr 2024APPA/430/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an application by an appellant convicted of kidnapping for life imprisonment seeking suspension of sentence execution and bail. The High Court allowed the application, exercising discretion on merits and parity with co-accused, and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of sentence execution pending appeal disposal; release on bail with Rs. 50,000 bond and monthly reporting conditions.

Mukesh @ Chayti Kishor Taywade Vs State of Maharashtra… — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:5120-DB

¶2

1 920.appa.430.24

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 430/2024 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 17/2024

¶6

Mukesh @ Chyati S/o. Kishor Taywade Vs. State of Maharashtra

¶7

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶9

¶10

Mr. A. K. Bhangde, Advocate for Applicant/Appellant. Mr. S. S. Doifode, A.P.P. for Non-applicant/State.

¶11

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 30/04/2024.

¶12

. This is an application seeking suspension of execution of sentence of accused No.1 Mukesh @ Chyati S/o. Kishor Taywade, who has been convicted by the Trial Court for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 364-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life.

¶13

The learned Counsel for the applicant claimed suspension on merits as well as parity stating that the coaccused, accused No.5 - Durwas and accused No.7 - Tayyub have been released by this Court having similar material. Moreover, it is submitted that the only evidence against the applicant is prior T.I. parade, which has been conducted after 7 months from the occurrence.

¶14

The State resisted this application by contending that the informant (PW-2) has specifically stated the name of the applicant as a kidnapper and the person kidnapped (PW-3) has identified the applicant in prior T.I. parade.

¶15

2 920.appa.430.24

¶16

With the assistance of both the sides, we have examined the relevant material. It is the case of kidnapping by unknown persons for ransom. The informant (PW-2father) is not the eye witness to the occurrence, however, he says that later on he learnt that his son has been kidnapped by his acquainted fellow accused No.6 - Pradip along with accused No.1 Mukesh. Besides that PW-3 a minor in T. I. Parade has identified accused No.1 - Mukesh (applicant), accused No.3 - Ishaq, accused No.5 - Durvas and accused No.7 - Tayyub. We have considered the said material against accused No.7 - Tayyub in detail while suspending his sentence in our order dated 20.12.2023 passed in Criminal Application No.682/2023. We have particularly observed that prior T. I. Parade is a process of investigation, which was conducted after 7 months from the occurrence.

¶17

We have gone through the related evidence of PW-3, who was initially unable to define the role of applicant - Mukesh though identified. The material against the applicant is similar to co-accused Tayyub, who has been released on bail. Besides that no other material is brought on record to show the complicity of accused No.1 Mukesh. We have taken a note that the applicant - Mukesh is in jail from 06.05.2016 i.e. for near about 7 years. Having regard to the material against the applicant, an arguable case particularly on the point of identity has been made out.

¶18

In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to exercise our judicial discretion on merits as well as on the

¶19

3 920.appa.430.24

¶20

ground of parity. The application is allowed. The execution of substantive sentence passed against the applicant Mukesh @ Chyati S/o. Kishor Taywade (accused No.1) stands suspended till the disposal of the appeal.

¶21

In the meantime, the applicant - Mukesh @ Chyati S/o. Kishor Taywade shall be released on bail on his furnishing PR bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount. The applicant Mukesh shall attend the concerned Police Station on first Monday of each month between 10.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m., till disposal of the appeal.

¶22

The application stands disposed of in the above

¶23

terms.

¶24

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.)

¶25

(VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶26

RGurnule

Mukesh @ Chayti Kishor Taywade v. State of Maharashtra, Thorigh Police Station Officer, Police Station, Sonegaon, Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh @ Chayti Kishor Taywade v. State of Maharashtra, Thorigh Police Station Officer, Police Station, Sonegaon, Nagpur

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

Rameshwar S/O Chunnilal Hardule Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary, Home Department, Mumbai 32 and Another

Smt Abha Harshwardhan Verma and 3 Others Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Sadar Nagpur and Another

Pradeep Madhusudan Jain Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Karanja Distt. Wardha and 1

Jasmika W/O Hitesh Kotangale Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. P. S. Durgapur Near Cpts Colony District Chandrapur and 1

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), Central Railway, Ajani, Nagpur and Others Vs Mallikarjun Sansthan, Digras Thr. President, Kishor Rambhau Banginwar

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), Central Railway, Ajani, Nagpur and Others Vs Smt. Surekha Prabhakar Nalamwar (Dead) through Lrs. Sanjay S/O Prabhakar Nalamwar