Disposed

Akshay Lahu Patil v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC27 Mar 2024BA/1258/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application in a murder case where materials included an extra-judicial confession to witness Suraj Laxman Patil and a statement that the applicant paid money to co-accused Pravin Jagtap for eliminating the deceased Mangesh. The applicant withdrew the application; the court directed trial completion within one year from framing of charge.

What the court decided

AI extract

Akshay Lahu Patil vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

4-BA-1258-2024+IA-2071-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Digitally signed by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SATISH SANGAR RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2024.07.02 18:50:36 +0530

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1258 OF 2024

¶5

Akshay S/o Lahu Patil Age : 27 Years, Occu. : Business, R/o. : Waklan, Post : Dahisar, Taluka and District : Thane. ...Applicant Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra (At the instance of Dahisar Police Station) ...Respondent

¶7

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2071 OF 2024 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1258 OF 2024

¶8

Uddesh Maruti Patil ...Applicant (Original Informant) In the matter between :- Akshay S/o Lahu Patil Age : 27 Years, Occu. : Business, R/o. : Waklan, Post : Dahisar, Taluka and District : Thane. ...Applicant

¶9

Versus The State of Maharashtra (At the instance of Dahisar Police Station) ...Respondent

*****

1/4

Satish Sangar

4-BA-1258-2024+IA-2071-2024.doc

¶14

Mr.Rahul Mote:-	Advocate for Applicant.
Mr.Laxman S. Deshmukh:-	Advocate for First Informant/Intervenor.
Mr.H.J.Dedhia:-	APP for Respondent–State.
Mr.Muzawar – P.I.:-	Presently attached to Traffic Control Branch – Navi Mumbai, Nhava Sheva.
Mr.Desai – P.S.I.:-	Shil-Diaghar Police Station.

¶15

¶16

CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 26^th JUNE 2024

¶17

P. C. :-

¶18

I have heard learned Advocate for the Applicant, learned APP and learned Advocate for the First-Informant at great length on the last date and today also.

¶19

Today, the matter is fixed for hearing the learned APP in order to ascertain the material about sim card No.8329234146. Today, the statement of one Yadav is shown to me. It is not part of the chargesheet. According to learned APP, it was recorded after filing of the charge-sheet. This witness has lost the mobile and he has not lodged any complaint.

¶20

When I have gone through all the materials, I am not inclined to grant bail for two reasons:-

¶21

2/4

¶22

Satish Sangar

¶23

4-BA-1258-2024+IA-2071-2024.doc

¶24

(a) There is extra judicial confession given by this Applicant to witness Suraj Laxman Patil and

¶25

(b) There is a statement of witness by name Bhanudas Laxman Mhaskar. This Applicant has paid certain amount to the Accused No.1 – Pravin Ramdas Jagtap. Later on, the witness came to know that the Applicant for the purpose of eliminating the deceased Mangesh, parted away the money. In his statement under Section 164 of the Code, though he has said about parting away the money by the Applicant, to whom he has parted away money is not there.

¶26

These two circumstances, according to learned Advocate for the Applicant, they are vague and they are inadmissible. It is a question of trial. The case of present Applicant and Ajinkya (who is granted bail) stands on different footing. The materials are different. So, I am not inclined to grant bail.

¶27

At this juncture, on instructions, there is a prayer to withdraw the Application. It is disposed of as withdrawn.

¶28

There is a request to expedite the trial. Learned APP Smt.Phad is appointed as a Special Public Prosecutor to conduct the trial. Let the trial be completed within a period of one (1) year from the date of

¶29

3/4

¶30

Satish Sangar

¶31

4-BA-1258-2024+IA-2071-2024.doc

¶32

framing of charge. If the Accused persons delay the trial, then certainly

¶33

prosecution is entitled for extension of the period.

¶34

In view of that, Interim Application stands disposed of.

¶35

[S. M. MODAK, J.]

¶36

4/4

¶37

Satish Sangar

Akshay Lahu Patil v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Akshay Lahu Patil 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

Omprakash@Babloo@Arun Vishwanath Prasad Shrivastav vs the State of Maharashtra

Shri. Bhavani Devi Devasthan through Its Manager / Pujari Shri. Onkareshwar Bhavani Patil vs Amarsinh Kankojirao Deshmukh and Ors.

Shankar Chhana Vasava and Ors. Vs the State (Union Territory)

Suresh B. Patil Vs Bhimrao Pandurang Diwate and Anr.

Siddhesh Shivaji Shelar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Visjhwajit @ Sanjay Prabhakar Chandorkar vs the State of Maharashtra