Allowed

Kiran Rajendra Pisal v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC5 Aug 2024BA/942/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 439 CrPC by a person arrested under IPC Sections 392 and 120(B) read with MCOCA provisions, in jail over eight years while trial remained at an initial stage. The Court granted bail on conditions including PR bond of Rs. 1,00,000, residence outside Pune District, and monthly police station attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail in Crime No. 40 of 2016 on PR bond of Rs.1,00,000 with sureties, subject to residence and reporting conditions.

Kiran Rajendra Pisal vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

915-BA-942-2024 (CR).doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION. NO. 942 OF 2024

¶3

Kiran Rajendra Pisal … Applicant Versus State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶4

Mr. Ranjeet M. Pawar, for the Applicant. Mr. Avinash A. Naik, A.P.P. for the Respondent – State. K.S. Vhatkar, API, Khadak Police Station, Pune, present.

¶5

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 7^th AUGUST, 2024

¶6

P.C.:

¶7

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of

¶8

Criminal Procedure.

¶9

ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL

¶10

Digitally signed by ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2024.08.07 18:41:23 +0530

¶11

The applicant came to be arrested in Crime No. 40 of 2016 registered at the Khadak Police Station, Pune City for the offences punishable under Section 392, 120(B) of Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(1) (ii), 3(2), 3(4) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act.

¶12

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the Respondent-State.

¶13

1 of 3

¶14

Arun Sankpal

¶15

915-BA-942-2024 (CR).doc

¶16

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail for more than eight years. It is submitted that the trial is at initial stage as the prosecution has examined only one witness. It is further submitted that this Court by order dated 20.12.2023 in Bail Application No. 3627 of 2023 has released the gang leader on bail.

¶17

On the other hand, the learned APP submits that the applicant is a member of organized crime syndicate and is involved in six more crimes. It is submitted that looking at the seriousness of offences, the applicant may not be released on bail.

¶18

It is not disputed that the applicant is in jail for more than eight years. It is also not disputed that the trial is at initial stage.

¶19

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail on the following conditions.

¶20

(i) Application is allowed.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall be released on bail in

¶22

Crime No. 40 of 2016 registered at Khadak Police

¶23

Station, Pune City for the offences punishable

¶24

2 of 3

¶25

Arun Sankpal

¶26

915-BA-942-2024 (CR).doc

¶27

under Sections 392, 120(B) of Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(1) (ii), 3(2), 3(4) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act on furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶28

(iii) The applicant shall not enter into Pune District till conclusion of trail except to attend the dates before the trial Court.

¶29

(iv) The applicant shall provide the details of place where he is going to reside after his release on bail to the trial Court and concerned Police Station.

¶30

(v) The applicant shall attend the Police Station within whose jurisdiction he is going to reside after his release once in a month i.e., on first Saturday till conclusion of trial.

¶31

3 of 3

¶32

Arun Sankpal

Kiran Rajendra Pisal v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran Rajendra Pisal 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rahul Devidas Khanderao and Another vs Govindrao Janardhan Deshmukh

Rajendra S/O Bhimrao Panse vs Rajendra S/O Nanasaheb Thakare and Another

Smt. Mamata Wd/O Mahendrasingh Khutpale (Ku. Mamata D/O Gokulsingh Sengar) vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Ministry of Revenue, Mumbai and Others

Sushila Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd. vs Shanker Das Baijal and Anr.

Sanjay Sitaram Jagtap vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mahesh @ Mahentra Tapase vs State of Maharashtra