Bombay High Court
Amar Nanasaheb Chavan vs The State Of Maharashtra on 31 July, 2019
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
1/5 40-BA 1071-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1071 OF 2019
Amar Nanasaheb Chavan .... Applicant
versus
The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
.......
• Mr.Vikas B. Shivarkar, Advocate for Applicant.
• Mr.S.H. Yadav, APP for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 31st JULY, 2019
P.C. :
1. The Applicant is seeking his bail in connection with
C.R.No. 445/17 registered at Pimpri Police Station, Pune under
sections 395, 387, 506 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, under
Sections 4 read with 25 of the Indian Arms Act and under
Sections 37(1) read with 135 of Maharashtra Police Act.
2. The FIR is lodged by one Suresh Pawar on 1 st August
2017 in respect of the incident which had taken place in the
night of 31st July 2017. He had stated in his FIR that he was
Nikita Gadgil
::: Uploaded on - 02/08/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2019 20:36:28 :::
2/5 40-BA 1071-19.odt
having his cart and he used to sell Dosa near 'D' Mart,
Chinchwad. There were other Dosa vendors, who were also
having their carts around his cart. On 31st July 2017, at about
10.15 p.m., seven to eight persons came there with wooden
sticks and sickles. One of them claimed himself to be Amar
Chavan. He removed Rs. 3350/- collected by the first informant
from his business by showing weapon. His associates damaged
other hand carts and removed some amount from the other food
vendors. Thereafter, they left the place. The first informant
lodged the FIR. The applicant was arrested on 2 nd August 2017
and since then he is in custody. The investigation is over and
chargesheet is already filed.
3. Heard, Mr. Shivarkar, learned counsel for the applicant
and Mr. Yadav, learned APP for the State.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that spot
panchanama does not support the case of the prosecution. He
submitted that though there were previous offences registered
against the present applicant, in all those offences he has
acquitted. He further submitted that the present FIR is lodged
Nikita Gadgil
::: Uploaded on - 02/08/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2019 20:36:28 :::
3/5 40-BA 1071-19.odt
against him only to create record for his detention under
M.P.D.A. He submitted that the statements of eye witnesses do
not support the case of the first informant.
5. Learned APP submitted the manner in which the
offence is committed does not entitle the applicant to be
released on bail. He submitted that the offence is serious and
such incident can not be tolerated. He submitted that looking at
the past history of the applicant, it appears that he has not
improved and he has made continuous nuisance in the locality.
6. I have considered these submissions. The spot
panchanama shows that the chairs and stools around the carts
were lying scattered. There was some damage to other hand
carts also. So at this stage, the spot panchanama corroborates
the story of the first informant. There are statements of other
food vendors, who were the eye witnesses to the incident. Some
of them are victims. Those witnesses are Ilias Qureshi,
Pawansingh Soni, Murad Alimulla, Mahesh Yadav, Mithun
Madhure, Dashrath Thakur and Kuldeep Singh, etc. All these
witnesses have stated that the present applicant had committed
Nikita Gadgil
::: Uploaded on - 02/08/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2019 20:36:28 :::
4/5 40-BA 1071-19.odt
the offence. No test identification parade was conducted to
enable them to identify the present applicant. Apart from this,
there is a statement recorded under Section 27 of the Indian
Evidence Act leading to recovery of Koyata, three iron rods, two
wooden sticks and amount of Rs. 1700/-. Thus, at this stage
there is definite some evidence against the present applicant
connecting him with the offence. However, at the time of
offence the applicant was less then 20 years of age. His date of
birth is 4th October 1997. Therefore, he deserves to be treated
with some leniency. In the entire incident none of the victims
had suffered any injury. Apart from the present applicant, none
of the other associates is arrested. As per the submission of the
learned counsel for the applicant, he is acquitted from all other
cases. The applicant is in custody since 2nd August 2017 i.e. for
almost three years he is in custody. The trial is not likely to be
concluded in near future.
7. In this view of the matter, I am inclined to grant bail to
the applicant. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
Nikita Gadgil ::: Uploaded on - 02/08/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2019 20:36:28 ::: 5/5 40-BA 1071-19.odt
(i) The Applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.445/17 registered at Pimpri Police Station, Pune, on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(ii) Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Nikita Gadgil ::: Uploaded on - 02/08/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2019 20:36:28 :::