Allowed

Satish Rambhau Chavhan v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC11 Oct 2024BA/1571/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by an applicant arrested for offences including robbery (snatching) under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, arising out of a road robbery registered at Pathari Police Station. The court noted the applicant was a first-time offender, that no robbed amount was recovered from him, and granted bail on a personal bond with conditions.

What the court decided

AI extract

Satish Rambhau Chavhan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:24694

¶2

934-BA-1571-24.odt

¶3

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1571 OF 2024

¶6

SATISH RAMBHAU CHAVHAN VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶8

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Swapnil D. Gawate APP for Respondents : Ms. Vaishali S. Chaudhari

¶9

CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J. DATE : 11-10-2024

¶10

PER COURT :-

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶12

The applicant seeks bail in C.R.No.405 of 2024 registered with Pathari Police Station, District Parbhani, for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2), 126(2), 115(2), 351(2) and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶13

The complainant has a case of road robbery. All accused were apprehended on the spot. The police seized the robed money and the weapons kept in the car. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.07.2024.

¶14

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant runs the business of providing a car on hire. The car was

¶15

934-BA-1571-24.odt

¶16

¶17

his. The co-accused threatened to travel them. He went with them. He does not know about the alleged weapons kept in his car. The money is not recovered from his person. In fact, he is the victim of the other co-accused. Nothing is to be recovered from him. Hence, he may be granted bail.

¶18

The learned A.P.P. for the State has relied upon recovery of the weapons from the vehicle of the applicant and submitted that the accused have committed two crimes simultaneously. If the applicant was innocent, he should not go with them for committing another crime. The offence is serious. The investigation is going on. The applicant was also apprehended on the spot of the incident. Besides this, the first informant identified him. Hence, he does not deserve bail.

¶19

Perused the application and the papers.

¶20

Admittedly, the applicant was travelling with the other coaccused. However, no robbed amount has been recovered from him. He appears not alighted from the car while committing the offence. He is the first time offender. Considering role, if the bail is granted, it would no harm to the prosecution. Hence, the order:-

¶21

ORDER

¶22

i) The application is allowed.

¶23

ii) Applicant – Satish Rambhau Chavhan be released on bail, on furnishing PB and SB of Rs.50,000/-, with one solvent

¶24

3 934-BA-1571-24.odt

¶25

surety of the like amount, in the above crime for the aforesaid offences, on the conditions that,

¶26

(a) He should not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶27

(b) He should attend the Police Station as and when called by the Investigating Officer on written notice, till filing the chargesheet.

¶28

( S. G. MEHARE ) JUDGE

¶29

rrd

Satish Rambhau Chavhan v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Satish Rambhau Chavhan v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Karimkhan Shaikh Turab Khan Vs Shannobee Shaikh Karimkhan and Anr.

Bapurao S/O Natthu Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Namdeo Dadarao Kachkure Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunanda W/O Anil Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Tulshiram Murlidhar Kale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Satish Balu Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another