Allowed

Shubham Vinod Jaiswal v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Nandura Tq. Nandura, Dist. Buldhana

Bombay HC17 May 2024BA/491/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge permitted bail to three applicants (Satav, Bavane, Jaiswal) in a riot-related case. The judge held that the investigation was complete and further custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on executing PR Bond of Rs. 25,000/- each with one solvent surety, subject to condition of not inducing witnesses.

Shubham Vinod Jaiswal vs the State of Maharashtra Thr… — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:5767

¶2

ba479.2024+2.odt

¶3

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 479 OF 2024

¶6

Vasudeo @ Vasu Mahadeo Satav (In Jail) V/s State of Maharashtra

¶7

AND

¶8

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 487 OF 2024

¶9

Rahul s/o Vasanta Bavane (In Jail) V/s State of Maharashtra AND

¶10

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 491 OF 2024

¶11

Shubham Vinod Jaiswal (In Jail) V/s State of Maharashtra

¶12

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order

¶13

Mr. D.I. Jain, counsel for the Applicants.

¶14

Mr. H.R.Dhumale, APP for the non-applicant/State.

¶15

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J. DATED : 21/05/2024.

¶16

These applications are filed by the applicants for grant of bail, in connection with Crime No. 235/2024 registered with Police Station Nandura, District Buldhana for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 308, 353, 427 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

¶17

The accusation against the present applicants is on the basis of report lodged by the Shrikrushna Devrao Hadde on an allegation that on the occasion of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Jayanti, there was a rift between the two

¶18

rkn

¶19

2 ba479.2024+2.odt

¶20

communities, and during that procession, they have pelted stone towards each other, wherein the Police Personnel sustained the injuries and police vehicles are also damaged. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as far as the present applicants are concerned, no specific role is attributed to them. Now for a sufficient period, they are incarcerated. Now investigation is completed, further custodial interrogation is not required. The other co-accused are already released on bail, in view of that, they be released on bail.

¶21

Learned APP in all the applications strongly opposed the said application, on the ground that the present applicants acted as a leader of the communities and instigated the other members of the community to pelt stones, causing damage to the police vehicles. Therefore, if they are released on bail, they would tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶22

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and after going through the investigation papers, it reveals that during the rift of two communities, they pelted stones towards each other, wherein the police personnel sustained the injuries. As far as further incarceration is concerned, which is not required, as the investigation is practically completed. In view of that, all the applications deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:

¶23

a) The applications are allowed.

¶24

rkn

¶25

3 ba479.2024+2.odt

¶26

b) The applicant – (1) Vasudeo @ Vasu Mahadeo Satav in criminal application (BA) No. 479/2024; (2) Rahul s/o Vasanta Bavane in criminal application (BA) No. 487/2024 and (3) Shubham Vinod Jaiswal in Criminal Application (BA) No. 491/2024 shall be released on bail, in connection with Crime No. 235/2024 registered with Police Station Nandura, District Buldhana for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 308, 353 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one solvent surety in the like amount.

¶27

c) The applicants shall not induce, threat or promise any witnesses who are acquainted with the facts of the present case.

¶28

The criminal applications is disposed of.

¶29

[ URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.]

¶30

Signed by: Mr. R.K. NANDURKAR rkn Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 22/05/2024 13:20:32

Shubham Vinod Jaiswal v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Nandura Tq. Nandura, Dist. Buldhana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubham Vinod Jaiswal v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Nandura Tq. Nandura, Dist. Buldhana

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vasudeo @ Vasu Mahadeo Satav vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Pso, Nandura Tq. Nandura, Dist. Buldhana

Vinod S/O Gunwantrao Bhokte vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Deoli, Tq. Deoli, Dist. Wardha

Amit S/O Pradip Satao vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Nandura Tq. Nandura, Dist. Buldhana

Sanjaykumar Wamanrao Zade vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Department of Education, Mumbai and Others

Girish Prabhakarrao Kale vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Dept. of Education, Mumbai and Others

Dinesh Krushnarao Kohare vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Dept. of Education, Mumbai and Others