Allowed

Gahininath Baban Mane v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC11 Mar 2024BA/608/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant, a 20-year-old first-time offender, in a murder case where the trial had remained inactive for nearly three years. Conditions included reporting weekly, avoiding a specific taluka, and not influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000, prohibition to enter Daund taluka, and conditions to report weekly and not influence witnesses.

Gahininath Baban Mane Vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

16 BA 608.24.doc

¶2

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE

¶3

Digitally signed by BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2024.03.11 18:18:38 +0530

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.608 OF 2024

¶6

Gahininath Baban Mane

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶10

Ms. Sana Raees Khan a/w Mr. Aditya Parmar, Advocate/s, for the
Applicant.

¶11

Mr. Sameer M. Mangaonkar, APP, for Respondent-State.

¶12

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

¶13

DATED : 11th March 2024

¶14

P. C.

¶15

1. Heard Ms. Khan, learned Counsel for the Applicant and Mr.

¶16

Mangaonkar, learned APP for the Respondent-State.

¶17

2. This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439 of

¶18

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The relevant details are as

¶19

follows:-

¶20

`1.C. R. No.`	`588 of 2021`
`2.Date of registration of F.I.R.`	`5th July 2021`
`3.Name of Police Station`	`Yavat, District-Pune`
`4.Section/s invoked`	`302, 292, 109, 212, 143, 149, 504,` `506, 120B ofI.P.C., 1860;`
	`4(25) ofIndian Arms Act, 1959.`
`5.Date of incident`	`4th July 2021`
`6.Date of arrest`	`5th July 2021`
`7.Date of filing of Charge-sheet`	`22nd October 2021`

¶21

 Page No. 1/5

¶22

Dusane

¶23

16 BA 608.24.doc

¶24

3.The prosecution case is that on an earlier occasion, the deceased
had abused some of the Accused in a vulgar language and therefore, the
incident in question took place, in which the Accused have assaulted
the deceased with sword and sticks. As per the prosecution case, the
role attributed to the present Applicant is that he has assaulted the
deceased with a wooden stick.

¶25

4.Ms. Khan, learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the
Applicant is the young person of 20 years age, and that there are no
antecedents. The only role attributed to him is that he had assaulted the
deceased with a wooden stick. She submitted that the Accused is in
custody since more than 2 years and 8 months. She submitted that
there is no progress in the trial and even the Charge is also not framed
yet. She submitted that two Accused have been already granted bail,
one by the learned Trial Court and one by a learned Single Judge of this
Court (Coram : Prakash D. Naik, J.) by Order dated 17th October 2022
in Bail Application No.4434 of 2021.

¶26

5.On the other hand, Mr. Mangaonkar learned APP vehemently
opposed the Bail Application and submitted that the deceased have
been mercilessly assaulted by 6 accused persons and 3 to 4 unknown
persons. He pointed out the statements of eye-witnesses i.e. Santosh
Vitthal Shitkal (page-82), Amol alias Bhaiyya Laxman Shitkal (page-84)

¶27

 Page No. 2/5

¶28

Dusane

¶29

16 BA 608.24.doc

¶30

and Gulchand Rama Shitkar (page-86). Therefore, he submitted that
the Bail Application be rejected.

¶31

6.Perusal of the record shows that the incident in question took
place on 4th July 2021, F.I.R. was lodged on 5th July 2021 and the
Charge-sheet has been filed on 22nd October 2021. The Applicant is in
custody for about 2 years and 8 months. Till date, there is no further
progress in the trial and even the Charge is also not framed yet. The
trial is likely to take a considerably long time. The Applicant is a young
person aged 20 years, and there are no antecedents. Accordingly, the
Applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶32

7.Ms. Khan, learned Counsel for the Applicant after taking
instructions states that as several witnesses are from Taluka-Daund, the
Applicant will not enter Taluka-Daund, District-Pune, and that the
Applicant will reside at Shirur-Taluka, District-Pune.

¶33

8. The Applicant does not appear to be at risk of flight.

¶34

9. The Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.

¶35

10.Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing
conditions.

¶36

11.In view thereof, the following order:-

¶37

O R D E R

¶38

(a) The Applicant - Gahininath Baban Mane be released

¶39

on bail in connection with C. R. No.588 of 2021 registered

¶40

 Page No. 3/5

¶41

Dusane

¶42

16 BA 608.24.doc

¶43

with the Yavat Police Station, District - Pune on his furnishing
P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two local solvent
sureties in the like amount.

¶44

(b)The Applicant shall not enter the Daund taluka,
District-Pune after being released on bail, except for reporting
to the Investigating Officer, if called.

¶45

(c)On 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
of any change thereto.

¶46

(d)The Applicant shall report to the Shirur Police Station,
District - Pune once every week, on every Sunday between
11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. till the conclusion of the trial. The
Police Inspector of Shirur Police Station, District - Pune to
communicate details thereof to the Investigating Officer.

¶47

(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 such a person from
disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

¶48

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

¶49

 Page No. 4/5

¶50

Dusane

¶51

16 BA 608.24.doc

¶52

(g)The Applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The

¶53

Applicant shall co-operate with the Trial Court and shall not
seek unnecessary adjournments thereat.

¶54

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

¶55

12. The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶56

13.It is clarified that the observations made herein are prima facie,
and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its merits, and uninfluenced
by the observations made in this Order.

¶57

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶58

 Page No. 5/5

¶59

Dusane

Gahininath Baban Mane v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gahininath Baban Mane 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kiran Dhondiram Kambale Vs State of Maharashtra

Omkar Vinod Bhajnawale Vs State of Maharashtra

Amol Chandu Rathod Vs State of Maharashtra

Sabari Basera Chs Ltd. vs State of Maharashtra and 29 Ors.

The Union of India vs State of Maharashtra and 8 Ors.

Shailendra Shashi Nayar Vs the State of Maharashtra