Allowed

Shivanand Vitthal Shrirame v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC18 Jul 2024BA/1184/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 439 CrPC in a robbery and criminal conspiracy case. The court found no prima facie incriminating material against the applicant and noted his four-year incarceration, and granted bail on a personal recognisance bond with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail in Crime No.0233 of 2020 on PR bond of Rs.25,000 with one solvent surety, with conditions against tampering/evidence inducement and to attend trial.

Shivanand Vitthal Shrirame vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

(32) - ba-1184-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1184 OF 2024

¶5

Shivanand Vitthal Shriram ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶6

Ms. Priyanka Deshpande i/by Prachiti Deshpande, for the applicant. Ms. Geeta Mulekar, APP for the Respondent/State. H.D. Kokate, Head Constable, Khalapur Police Station, Present.

¶7

CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J.

¶8

Digitally signed by VARSHA VARSHA DEEPAK DEEPAK GAIKWAD GAIKWAD Date: 2024.07.18 19:17:56 +0530

¶9

DATE : 18TH JULY 2024.

¶10

PC:

¶11

Heard.

¶12

By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the applicant is seeking bail in Crime No.0233 of 2020, registered with Khalapur Police Station, Raigad for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 385, 170 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, (for short, ‘IPC’).

¶13

The applicant is in jail from last 4 years and after completion of the investigation the charge-sheet has been filed.

¶14

The learned APP strongly opposed the application.

¶15

1 of 3

¶16

varsha

¶17

(32) - ba-1184-2024.doc

¶18

However, having considered the charge-sheet and the material collected by the IO, I am of the opinion that prima facie there is no sufficient incriminating material available on record to show the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence.

¶19

In that view of the matter and considering the period of incarceration, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for grant of bail. Accordingly, I pass the following order:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

i) Criminal application is allowed;

¶22

ii) It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No.0233 of 2020, registered with Khalapur Police Station, Raigad for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 385, 170 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, (for short, ‘IPC’), on furnishing P.R.Bond of Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand with one solvent surety in the like amount;

¶23

iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also not tamper with the evidence;

¶24

iv) Liberty is granted to the State to apply for cancellation of bail if the applicant commits similar offence.

¶25

2 of 3

¶26

varsha

¶27

(32) - ba-1184-2024.doc

¶28

v) The applicant shall attend the trial before the trial Court regularly on every date unless exemption is granted by the trial Court.

¶29

The Criminal Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶30

(ANIL S. KILOR, J)

¶31

3 of 3

¶32

varsha

Shivanand Vitthal Shrirame v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivanand Vitthal Shrirame 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vikas Vitthal Ghobale vs State of Maharashtra

Nabir Abulkalam @Lokman Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra

Mohammad Shakir Mohammad Nazir Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra

Nilesh Shantaram Wani in Jail Custody vs State of Maharashtra

Prasad Deepak Shinde vs State of Maharashtra

Rupesh Sharanya Bhosale vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.