Bombay High Court
Javed Abdul Qadir Maniyar vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 April, 2024
Author: Shivkumar Dige
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal, Shivkumar Dige
2024:BHC-AS:19081-DB
:1: 1.ia-1053-24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1053 OF 2024
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.219 OF 2021
Javed Abdul Qadir Maniyar .....Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
-----
Ms. Anima Mishra, Advocate a/w. Anuj Singh i/b. AUPA JURILEX
for the Applicant.
Smt. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the Respondent-State.
-----
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL AND
SHIVKUMAR DIGE, JJ.
DATE : 23rd APRIL, 2024
P.C. :
1. This is the third time that the Applicant has
approached this Court for his release on bail during pendency of
his Appeal.
2. The Applicant was the accused No.2 in Sessions Case
No.20/2015 before the learned Sessions Judge, Nasik. Learned
Judge vide his judgment and order dated 7.7.2018 convicted the
Applicant and his co-accused Dnyaneshwar Patil for commission
1 of 6
Deshmane(PS)
::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2024 00:19:02 :::
:2: 1.ia-1053-24.odt
of the offences punishable under Section 489-A, 489-B, 489-C,
489-D and 489-E read with 34 of IPC. The major punishment
imposed on the Applicant and his co-accused was imprisonment
for life.
3. At the first instance, the Applicant had preferred
Criminal Application No.1081/2018 in Criminal Appeal
No.868/2018. That Appeal was preferred by both the accused
together. The Bail Application i.e. Criminal Application
No.1081/2018 was also jointly filed. A Division Bench of this
Court vide the order dated 13.8.2018 disposed of that application
as withdrawn. Learned counsel for the Applicants therein had
sought liberty to withdraw that application with further liberty to
apply after a period of two years, in the event the Appeal was not
heard in the meantime. After that, the Applicant filed a separate
appeal memo and his appeal was separated. It was numbered as
Criminal Appeal No.219/2021.
4. The Applicant preferred second bail application vide
Criminal Interim Application No.834/2021. It was decided on
17.3.2022. On that occasion, the other Division Bench had
2 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2024 00:19:02 :::
:3: 1.ia-1053-24.odt
directed that the Appeal itself be listed for final hearing in the
week commencing from 11.4.2022. In view of that position, the
bail application i.e. I.A. No.834/2021 in Criminal Appeal
No.219/2021 was disposed of.
5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the
Appeal is still not heard and decided. It is still pending. The
Applicant is in custody after his conviction on 7.7.2018. Thus,
more than six years have passed. The Appeal is not likely to be
heard in the near future. Considering these submissions, we have
heard learned counsel for the Applicant as well as learned APP.
6. Heard Ms. Anima Mishra, learned counsel for the
Applicant and Smt. M.H. Mhatre, learned APP for the
Respondent-State.
7. The prosecution case is that on 10.10.2014, the police
received a secrete information that two persons were to come to
Sainath Nagar, near Indiranagar, Nashik with counterfeit
currency notes of Rs.100/-. The police arranged to conduct a
raid. Two panchas were called. One bogus customer was
arranged for. All of them went to the spot. The raiding party
3 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2024 00:19:02 :::
:4: 1.ia-1053-24.odt
saw two persons at the spot. The bogus customer went near
them. After some time, he gave the predetermined signal. The
raiding party rushed there. Both the accused tried to run away
but both of them were caught at the spot. The Applicant was one
of them. They were found to carry counterfeit currency notes of
Rs.100/- denomination in 42 bundles. There were 4200 currency
notes worth about Rs.4,20,000/-. On this basis, the FIR was
lodged.
8. The co-accused of the Applicant led the police
officers to a place where the computer, printer and other articles
were found. They were seized.
9. During trial, the prosecution examined eleven
witnesses including the police officers, the panchas and the bogus
customer. The police officers and the panchas supported the
prosecution case. The bogus customer did not support the
prosecution case and he was declared hostile.
10. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the
Applicant was on bail during trial and he has not committed any
other offence while he was on bail. Even if the prosecution case
4 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2024 00:19:02 :::
:5: 1.ia-1053-24.odt
is taken at its highest, at the most Section 489-C may be
attracted. Under that Section, the maximum punishment
provided is seven years. The Applicant is already in custody for
almost six years. The other offences for which the Applicant is
convicted are not attracted.
11. Learned counsel for the Applicant relied on the order
passed by this Court in Criminal Interim Application
No.3380/2023 in Criminal Appeal No.868/2018. By that order,
the co-accused Dnyaneshwar Patil was granted bail during
pendency of his Appeal. That order was passed on 8.2.2024.
Learned counsel for the Applicant claimed parity.
12. Learned APP tried to oppose these submissions.
However, she could not oppose the submission that the parity
applies in this case as the co-accused is granted bail.
13. We have considered these submissions. As submitted
by learned counsel for the Applicant, in this case the principles of
parity apply. If at all, the Applicant's case may be better than the
case of the co-accused who is granted bail by the aforesaid order
dated 8.2.2024.
5 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2024 00:19:02 :::
:6: 1.ia-1053-24.odt
14. We find substance in the submission of learned
counsel for the Applicant that at the highest it could be a case
under section 489-C of IPC, for which the maximum punishment
is seven years. The Applicant is already in custody for about six
years.
15. In this view of the matter, since the Appeal is not
likely to be decided in the near future, the Applicant deserves to
be released on bail during pendency of his Appeal.
16. Hence, the following order :
:: O R D E R ::
i. During pendency and final disposal of the Criminal Appeal No.219/2021, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/-
(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.
ii. Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE,J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS) Digitally signed 6 of 6 by PRADIPKUMAR PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE DESHMANE Date:
2024.04.25 18:02:17 +0530 ::: Uploaded on - 25/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2024 00:19:02 :::