Allowed

Malhari Bharat Sonawane v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Mar 2024BA/2449/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed to applicant charged with NDPS offence regarding intermediate quantity of ganja after 15 months custody with chargesheet filed but charges not framed; cash bail granted with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail on Rs.25,000 surety or Rs.25,000 cash bail for 8 weeks; applicant to attend IO monthly, surrender passport, and not tamper with evidence or induce disclosure.

Malhari Bharat Sonawane Vs State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AS:10343

¶2

Urmila Ingale 13. BA 2449-23.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.2449 OF 2023

¶5

MALHARI BHARAT SONAWANE ..APPLICANT VS.

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT

¶7

Mr.Jay S. Patil, for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. PSI- Mr.Keshav Randive, Sangli City police station pesent.

¶8

CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶9

DATE : MARCH 4, 2024

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

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

¶12

This is an application for bail in respect of the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(2)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereafter ‘the NDPS Act’ for short) registered on 02/12/2022 vide C.R. No.771 of 2022 with Sangli City Police Station.

¶13

5 persons were travelling in a car. 4 accused are arrested and 1 is absconding. Total quantity found in the car is 1.97 kg. The applicant is the accused no.4. The

¶14

1/3

¶15

Urmila Ingale 13. BA 2449-23.doc

¶16

applicant was arrested on 02/12/2022. The contraband is ganja. The small quantity prescribed is 1000 grams. The commercial quantity is 20 kg. The applicant was thus in possession of 971 grams which is more than the minimum quantity prescribed. This can be regarded as an intermediate quantity. The applicant is in custody for almost 15 months. The charge has not been framed. There are no criminal antecedents reported against the applicant. The bar under section 37 of NDPS will not apply in the present case. In the facts of the present case, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail though learned APP opposed the application. The investigation is complete. The chargesheet has been filed. Hence, the following order :-

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

(a) The application is allowed.

¶19

(b) The applicant-Malhari Bharat Sonawane in connection with C.R. No. 771 of 2022 registered with Sangli City Police Station shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶20

¶21

2/3

¶22

Urmila Ingale 13. BA 2449-23.doc

¶23

surety.

¶24

(d) The applicant shall attend the Investigating OfÏcer of Sangli City police station once in a month every first Monday of the month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.

¶25

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

¶26

(f) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating OfÏcer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.

¶27

(g) The applicant shall attend the trial regularly.

¶28

(h) The applicant shall surrender his passport to the investigating ofÏcer. If the applicant does not have passport, he shall file the afÏdavit to that effect.

¶29

4. The application is disposed of.

¶30

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶31

3/3

¶32

Signed by: Urmila P. Ingale Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 04/03/2024 19:45:05

Malhari Bharat Sonawane v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malhari Bharat Sonawane 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shubham @ Dilshar Ashok Pawar Vs State of Maharashtra

Fairleo Sulorram Mesca Vs State of Maharashtra

Arifa Jamir Pathan Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Clarence Rodrigues Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prakash Dattu Vayale Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manish Devilal Darji Vs the State of Maharashtra