Partly allowed

Dinesh Pralhad Pandya v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Apr 2024APPLN/121/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought relaxation of a Sessions Court bail condition requiring weekly attendance at Sewree Police Station in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case. The High Court found he had been attending as directed and, being a senior citizen, modified the condition to monthly attendance on the first Monday, directing trial cooperation.

What the court decided

AI extract

Dinesh Pralhad Pandya vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

bipin prithiani

18-appln-121.24.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 121 OF 2024

¶6

… Dinesh Pralhad Pandya Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶7

¶8

Ms. Sumaiya Khan i/by Munira Palanpurwala for the Applicant. Mr. Balraj B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State. Mr. Sunil Kshirsagar, PSI, Sewree Police Station.

¶9

¶10

CORAM: MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : 26^th AUGUST 2024

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the respondent-State.

¶13

By this application, the applicant seeks modification of condition No.2(iii) imposed by the Sessions Court, while granting bail to the applicant by order dated 18^th July 2019 in connection with FIR No. 208 of 2018 registered against the applicant for offences under Sections 420 and 408 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The said condition reads as follows :

¶14

“(iii) He shall cooperate the investigating agency and shall attend Sewree Police Station on very Monday in between 11.00 am. to 02.00 pm till conclusion of trial.”

¶15

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a senior citizen, who is now aged about 70 years. He is

bipin prithiani

18-appln-121.24.doc

attending the Police Station as directed in the above quoted condition on every Monday. But, now he is finding the condition onerous. The trial is underway and two witnesses have been examined. It is submitted that in such a situation, this Court may consider modifying the said condition.

¶20

On the other hand, the learned APP submits that as per his instructions, the applicant has not been regular in abiding by the said condition. Further, attention of this Court is invited to the proceedings before the Magistrate, wherein, on a particular date, since neither the applicant nor his advocate were present, during the course of recording of evidence, the Court of Magistrate was constrained to issue non-bailable warrant against the applicant.

¶21

This Court has perused the aforesaid proceedings. It appears that on 24^th March 2023, such a direction was indeed issued by the Magistrate, as neither the applicant nor his advocate were present during the course of the proceedings. But, subsequent proceedings dated 2^nd November 2023, indicates that further evidence is being recorded and trial is clearly underway.

¶22

The issuance of the non-bailable warrant has nothing to do with the applicant abiding by the above quoted condition. Along with the application, the applicant has placed on record photo copies of documents, showing his presence before the Police Station, as per the aforesaid condition. Such documents show that from the time the order was passed by the Sessions Court

bipin prithiani

18-appln-121.24.doc

imposing the said condition while granting bail, till 29^th January 2024, the applicant had been attending Police Station as per the directions. The applicant is a senior citizen aged about 70 years. The offences registered in the present case are Sections 420 and 408 of the IPC. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is inclined to partly allow the present application by modifying the above quoted condition.

¶27

Accordingly, the application is partly allowed and the above quoted condition is modified as follows :

¶28

“(iii) He shall attend the Sewree Police Station on the first Monday of every month between 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon, till conclusion of trial.”

¶29

Considering the facts brought to the notice of this Court by the learned APP, the applicant is directed to attend the proceedings before the Magistrate, during the course of the trial, on each and every date and to cooperate with the proceedings for expeditious disposal of the same.

¶30

MANISH PITALE, J.

¶31

BIPINDHARMENDERPRITHIANI Digitally signed by BIPINDHARMENDER PRITHIANIDate: 2024.08.26 18:39:02+0530

Dinesh Pralhad Pandya v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Dinesh Pralhad Pandya v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dr. Nagaraj Narayan Rao Vs Not Applicable

Vinay Premchand Kothari Vs Alok Premchand Kothari (Caveator)

Sujata Sudarshan Shetty Vs Govind Anappa Shetty

Imran Aslam Divkar vs Union of India and Anr.

Anil Madhusudan Dave and 2 Ors. Vs Madhusudan Ambalal Dave Alias M.A. Dave Alias Madusudan a. Dave Alias Madusudanbhai Dave (Deceased)

Simon Harold Attwood vs Sybil Beatrice Hughes (Deceased)