Allowed

Malinga Sharanappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC11 Jan 2024BA/2311/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge High Court allowed regular bail on a weak case on the ground that investigation was complete, other co-accused were on bail, and extra-judicial confession is weak evidence not to be relied upon at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount subject to certain conditions.

Malinga Sharanappa Mhetre Vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

926 BA 2311.23.doc Dusane

¶2

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE

¶3

Digitally signed by BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2024.01.11 19:44:21 +0530

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2311 OF 2023

¶5

Malinga Sharnappa Mhetre …Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra …Respondent

¶8

Ms. Shubhangi Parulekar a/w Mr. Anosh Londhe for Applicant Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. B.M. Rapkar (API) Warje Malwadi Police Station, Pune City, present.

¶9

CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 11^th JANUARY 2024

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1. Heard Ms. Parulekar, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and Mrs. Shinde, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State.

¶12

2. This is a regular Bail Application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶13

3. The relevant details are as follows:

¶14

1.	C.R. No.	25 of 2021
2.	Date of Registration of F.I.R.	20.01.2021
3.	Police Station	Warje Malwadi, Pune District
4.	Sections Applied	302, 201 of I.P.C., 1860
5.	Date of Incident	20.01.2021
6.	Date of Arrest	24.01.2021
7.	Date of filing of Charge-sheet	20.04.2022

¶15

¶16

926 BA 2311.23.doc Dusane

¶17

4. As per the prosecution case, the deceased was a habitual alcoholic and used to assault several people in the locality. It is the prosecution case that there are total 8 accused involved in the crime in which the deceased was killed.

¶18

5. Ms. Shinde, learned APP strongly opposed the Bail Application on the ground that there is an extra-judicial confession by the present Applicant and the C.D.R. also shows the presence of the accused.

¶19

6. However, in this case the investigation is complete and the Charge-sheet is filed on 20^th April 2022. There are 28 witnesses as reflected in the Charge-sheet. The trial is unlikely to conclude any time soon and is likely to take a considerably long time. The present Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.

¶20

7. It is clear that the role of all the Accused is almost identical. 7 out of 8 Accused are already enlarged on bail. Therefore, the bail cannot be rejected on the ground of C.D.R.

¶21

8. As far as the contention that the Applicant has made an extra-judicial confession is concerned, Ms. Parulekar, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant is right in submitting that the extra-judicial confession is a weak kind of evidence. The same is required to be proved at the time of trial. Therefore the same can not be relied upon as a ground for rejecting a Bail

¶22

¶23

926 BA 2311.23.doc Dusane

¶24

Application.

¶25

9. The Applicant does not appear to be a flight risk.

¶26

10. Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing conditions. Hence, the following order:-

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

(a) The Applicant Malinga Sharnappa Mhetre be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.25 of 2021, registered with Warje Malwadi Police Station, District Pune on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶29

(b) After being released on bail, the Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case there is any change.

¶30

(d) The Applicant shall report to the Warje Malwadi Police Station, District Pune once every week, on every Sunday between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. till the conclusion of trial.

¶31

(e) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise or any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer.

¶32

¶33

926 BA 2311.23.doc Dusane

¶34

(f) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witnesses in any manner.

¶35

(g) The Applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The Applicant shall co-operate with the trial Court and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

¶36

(h) The Applicant shall surrender his/her passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer.

¶37

11. The Application is disposed of.

¶38

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶39

Malinga Sharanappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malinga Sharanappa Mhetre 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

Similar cases

Lalu @ Lalman Laxman Khade Vs State of Maharashtra

Kisan Rajaram Sonkar Vs State of Maharashtra

Shahid Sadik Mujawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prahalad Baluram Prajapati Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohd Akhtar Mathar Hussain Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mangesh Dattatray Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra