Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Shekhar Subhash Shinde vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 17 January, 2024

Author: Sarang V. Kotwal

Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal

2024:BHC-AS:2472


                    Nikita

                                                             1/5                       908-ba-3969-2023.odt

                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                                     BAIL APPLICATION NO.3969 OF 2023

                               Shekhar Subhash Shinde                                   ..... Applicant
         NIKITA
         KAILAS
         DARADE                         versus
        Digitally signed by
        NIKITA KAILAS
        DARADE
        Date: 2024.01.18
        17:29:46 +0630


                               The State of Maharashtra and Anr.                        ... Respondents


                               Mr. Salman Pathan a/w Anshuman R. Asare a/w Sanket Salunkhe
                               a/w N. Pathan for the Applicant.
                               Ms. Mahalakshmi Ganapathy, APP for the State/Respondent.
                               Mr. Swapnil C. Jadhav Dy.Sp. Daund, Pune (I.O.) is present.

                                                             CORAM   : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
                                                             DATE    : 17th JANUARY 2024

                               P.C. :


                               1.       The Applicant is seeking bail in connection with C.R. No.296

                                    of 2019, registered at Yawat Police Station, Pune under Sections

                                    392, 395, 363, 365, 347, 341 read with 34 of the IPC and under

                                    Sections 3(1)(ii) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of

                                    Organized Crime Act, 1999.

                               2.       Heard Mr. Salman Pathan, learned counsel for the Applicant

                                    and Ms.Mahalakshmi Ganapathy, APP for the State.




                              ::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2024                ::: Downloaded on - 19/01/2024 23:05:32 :::
                                      2/5                            908-ba-3969-2023.odt

 3.      The prosecution case is that on 26th March 2019, the first

      informant Ramprasad Rathod was driving a truck within the

      jurisdiction of the Yawat Police Station at around 9.30 P.M.. He

      was carrying 31 tonnes of wheat from Rajasthan to Goa. There

      was another driver Nandlal Thakur with him. The truck was

      intercepted by a Wagon R car and three unknown persons

      climbed in the truck. The mobile phones of the drivers were

      taken by them. They were taken at some distance and then they

      were asked to get down. The truck was taken to District Solapur.

      The wheat was sold to two shop owners. Subsequently, the

      Applicant and others were arrested. The Applicant was arrested

      on 1st April 2019, and since then, he is in custody. During the

      investigation,           provisions   of   the   Maharashtra           Control        of

      Organized Crime Act, 1999 were applied. The investigation was

      completed and the charge-sheet was filed.

 4.      The Applicant had earlier preferred the Criminal Bail

      Application No.911 of 2020. It was allowed to be withdrawn

      unconditionally by this Court vide the order dated 18 th February

      2021. After that, some of the co-accused were released on bail




::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2024                           ::: Downloaded on - 19/01/2024 23:05:32 :::
                                3/5                          908-ba-3969-2023.odt

      by the honourable Supreme Court and by different benches of

      this Court. Therefore, the Applicant has preferred this

      application on the ground of delay in trial and also on parity.

 5.      Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the

      following circumstances are against him.

         i)       He was identified in a Test Identification Parade;

         ii)      He received money in his account after selling that

         wheat, and;

         iii)     confessional statement of co-accused mentioning his

         role.

 6.      He submitted that, though the Applicant was identified in

      the parade by both the drivers; even Sachin Gajage was

      identified, Sachin Gajage was granted bail by the Honourable

      Supreme Court. The co-accused Sagar Chavan was also

      identified in the parade. He is also on bail. Therefore, parity

      applies to the present Applicant.

 7.      Learned APP, submitted that all these circumstance are not

      exactly similar to those against the other co-accused. The receipt

      of large amount in the Applicant's account after sale of the




::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2024                   ::: Downloaded on - 19/01/2024 23:05:32 :::
                                4/5                       908-ba-3969-2023.odt

      wheat is an additional circumstance which is only against the

      present Applicant. On that ground she opposed the grant of bail

      in this case. However, she could not make a statement as to

      when the examination of witnesses would actually commence.

 8.      I have considered these submissions. The Applicant is in

      custody since 1st April 2019. Almost four years and nine months

      are passed. Honourable Supreme Court had released the

      co-accused Sachin Gajage on bail, who had played similar role in

      the offence. He was in custody for about three and a half years.

      The role of the Applicant and the said co-accused Sachin Gajage

      is similar, except that the Applicant has received money. But the

      fact remains that the Applicant has spent more time in jail than

      Sachin who is granted bail. Apart from that, the other

      co-accused Sagar Chavan and Mangesh Chavan, who have

      played major roles were also granted bail. The trial is not likely

      to commence and conclude soon. Therefore, taking into account

      all these facts, the Applicant deserves to be released on bail on

      similar conditions as imposed by the Honourable Supreme Court

      on the co-accused Sachin Gajage.




::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2024                ::: Downloaded on - 19/01/2024 23:05:32 :::
                                       5/5                          908-ba-3969-2023.odt

 9. Hence, the following order :

                                            ORDER

(i) The Applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.296 of 2019 registered at Yawat Police Station, Pune, on his execution P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall not enter the districts Solapur, Satara, Sangli, Pune, and Ahmednagar, unless he is required to attend any trial.

(iii) He shall intimate his address, where he will be residing to the Investigation Officer as well as to the Police Station of the area within which he would reside, and report to the said Police Station in the first week of every month.

(iv) The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) ::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 19/01/2024 23:05:32 :::