Shivputra Harivijay Bhosale vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2024)

Shivputra Harivijay Bhosale vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant directed to be released on bail in Crime No. 63 of 2023 (Vijapurnaka Police Station) on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount, subject to conditions: attendance at Vijapurnaka Police Station on the 1st and 16th day of every month between 12.00 noon and 2.00 p.m. until conclusion of trial (except on trial dates); no inducement, threat or promise to persons acquainted with the facts and no tampering with evidence; liberty reserved to the State to apply for cancellation of bail if the applicant commits a similar offence; regular attendance before the Trial Court on every date unless exempted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, booked in Crime No. 63 of 2023 for offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 r/w 34 IPC and Section 66-D IT Act, is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC. +2 more

Court's answer

As the trial is unlikely to be concluded in the near future, the applicant is entitled to grant of bail.

Ratio / Principle

Since the charge-sheet has been filed after completion of investigation and the offence rests on documentary evidence already in the custody of the Investigating Officer, further custody of the applicant is not necessary.

Key takeaways

The APP's habitual-offender objection does not bar bail: of the three antecedents, two are of 2004 and the third (2023) is similar, and co-accused Minakshi Gaikwad has already been released on bail.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted under Section 439 CrPC to Shivpratap Harivijay Bhosale in Crime No. 63 of 2023 registered with Vijapurnaka Police Station, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (allegations of forgery). Grounds: charge-sheet filed after completion of investigation; offence rests on documentary evidence already in the Investigating Officer's custody, so further custody unnecessary; of three antecedents, two date to 2004 and the 2023 antecedent is the similar one, blunting the APP's habitual-offender objection; co-accused Minakshi Gaikwad already released on bail; applicant detained about one and a half years and trial unlikely to conclude in the near future. Release ordered on P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety in like amount, with periodic reporting at Vijapurnaka Police Station on the 1st and 16th of each month (12 noon–2 p.m.), non-tampering/no-inducement conditions, liberty to the State to seek cancellation upon commission of a similar offence, and mandatory trial attendance. Single-judge decision of Anil S. Kilor, J., dated 12 August 2024; order corrected as per order dated 3rd October, 2024.

38-BA-451-24 -CORRECTED.DOC

Sayali Upasani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 451 OF 2024

Shivpratap Harivijay Bhosale ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

Mr. Jaydeep D. Mane, for the applicant. Mrs. Priyanka Rane, APP, for State-Respondent. Mr. R. P. Tathe, ASI, Vijapurnaka Police Station, Present.

CORAM:- ANIL S. KILOR, J.

DATED:- 12^th AUGUST, 2024

PC:-

Heard.

By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant is seeking bail in Crime No.63 of 2023 registered with Vijapurnaka Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, 2000.

1/3

The order corrected as per order dated 3^rd October, 2024

38-BA-451-24 -CORRECTED.DOC

1. The allegations against the applicant are of forgery. The applicant is in jail from last one and half years. As far as the antecedents are concerned, there are three antecedents against the applicant. However, the two are of the year 2004 and third one is of the year 2023, which is the similar one.

In the present matter, the charge-sheet has been filed after completion of the investigation and since the offence relates to documentary evidence, which is already in custody of the Investigating Officer. Hence, I am of the opinion that further custody of the applicant is not necessary.

The learned APP strongly opposing the present application on the ground that he is habitual. However, as I have observed that earlier two offences are of the year 2004 and third one is of in the year 2023. Furthermore, co-accused- Minakshi Gaikwad has already been released on bail.

In the circumstances, since there is unlikelihood that the trial will be concluded in near future, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to grant of bail. Hence, I pass the following order.

ORDER

i. The Bail Application is allowed;

ii. It is directed that the Applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No.63 of 2023 registered with Vijapurnaka Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act,

2/3

The order corrected as per order dated 3^rd October, 2024

38-BA-451-24 -CORRECTED.DOC

2000, on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount;

iii The applicant shall attend the said Police Station on 1^st and 16^th day of every month between 12.00 noon to 2.00 p.m., till the conclusion of the trial except on the date of trial;

iv. 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;

v. Liberty is granted to the State to apply cancellation of bail if the applicant commits similar offence.;

vi. The Applicant shall attend the trial before the Trial Court regularly on every date unless exempted by the Trial Court for any reason.

vii. Application stands disposed of, accordingly.

[ANIL S. KILOR, J.]

3/3

The order corrected as per order dated 3^rd October, 2024