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 13, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Sunil @ Chinnu Mahesh Walmiki vs State Of Maharashtra on 3 November, 2023

Author: M. S. Karnik

Bench: M. S. Karnik

2023:BHC-AS:33436



                    PMB                                                7.ba.3094-23.doc


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                              BAIL APPLICATION NO.3094 OF 2023

                    SUNIL @ CHINNU MAHESH WALMIKI           ..APPLICANT
                         VS.
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                ..RESPONDENT
                                            ------------
                    Adv. Aniket Ujjwal Nikam a/w Adv. Aashish I. Satpute a/w
                    Adv. Amit R. Icham for the Applicant.
                    Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for the State.
                    PSI M. J. Ghadage, Pen Police Station, Raigad.
                                               ------------

                                           CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

                                           DATE     : NOVEMBER 3, 2023
                    P.C. :

                    1.     Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned

                    APP for the State.

                    2.     This is an application for bail in respect of the offence

                    punishable under Sections 395, 397, 347, 412 of the Indian

                    Penal Code (hereafter 'IPC' for short), under Sections 4, 25

                    of Arms Act and under Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the

                    Maharashtra     Control   of   Organised   Crime    Act,    1999

                    (hereafter 'MCOCA', for short) registered on 29.12.2015

                    vide FIR bearing C.R. No.I-242 of 2015 with Pen Police

                    Station, Raigad.

                                                                                  1/7
 PMB                                                    7.ba.3094-23.doc


3.     It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant is a

part of the Organized Crime Syndicate which is headed by

the gang leader - Ravi Ramesh Shinde. The prosecution

case in brief is as under :-

        On 29.12.2015 at about 2.15 pm, the informant

Gopalkrishna Gopikrishna Gupta, working as Deputy Branch

Manager in Bank of Maharashtra, Branch - Varasai, Tal -

Pen, Dist - Raigad along with one bank peon namely Sandip

Shantaram Khot were going from Bank of Maharashtra, Pen

Branch to Varasai Branch in Minidoor Rickshaw bearing

No.MH-06-S-5495       along    with   one   suitcase     containing

Rs.25,00,000/-. At that time three unknown persons came

on two motorcycles and threatened the complainant with

the help of country made pistol and knife and robbed an

amount of Rs.25,00,000/- and three mobile phones and key

of    Minidoor   Rickshaw     and   ran   away.   Thereafter,     the

complainant lodged the complaint vide C.R. No.242 of 2015

with Pen Police Station, Raigad for the offences punishable

under Sections 395, 397, 120(b) of IPC read with Sections

3, 25 of Arms Act.



                                                                  2/7
 PMB                                              7.ba.3094-23.doc


4.    There are in all twelve accused. The applicant is the

accused No.3. The applicant was arrested on 26.01.2016.

5.    Learned APP invited my attention to the affidavit-in-

reply filed on behalf of the respondent. The affidavit-in-

reply is affirmed by Shivaji D. Phadtare, Sub-Divisional

Police Officer, Sub-Division Pen, District Raigad. It is

submitted that during the course of the investigation,

memorandum statement of the present applicant was

recorded on 03.02.2016 and 08.02.2016 and as per his

memorandum panchnama, he produced Rs.10,000/- from

the robbed amount. It is the contention of learned APP that

though an amount of Rs.10,000/- was recovered, the

applicant is the beneficiary of the major part of the amount.

It is further submitted that the applicant has been identified

during the identification parade. The identification parade

was conducted after about three and a half months.

Learned APP further submitted that the applicant was

actively involved in the commission of the offence and the

present applicant is the one who threatened the peon

Sandip Khot and took away the suitcase having cash



                                                            3/7
 PMB                                                  7.ba.3094-23.doc


amount of Rs.25,00,000/- and mobile of the peon. The role

of the applicant is disclosed in paragraph 13 of the affidavit-

in-reply which reads thus :-

      "I say that after that accused no.2 (Umar Salim Sharif), 3
      (present accused applicant), 9 (Suraj Dayare), 11 (Kailas
      Hisalge), 12 (Roshan Dayare) and 13 (Mangal Singh
      Bhond) blocked the way of minidoor rickshaw with their
      motor cycles and threatened the complainant with the
      help of country made pistol and knife and robbed an
      amount of Rs.25,00,000/- from the said minidoor
      rickshaw. The present applicant/accused No.3 Sunil @
      Chinu Valmiki and accused no.13 Mangalsingh @
      Raftarsingh Poladsingh Bhond and Accused No.9 (Suraj
      Dayare), threatened the complainant and minidoor
      rickshaw driver Manoj Ramdas Panap with country made
      pistol and snatched their mobiles. Then the present
      applicant/accused no.3 Sunil @ Chinu Walmiki threatened
      peon Sandeep Khot with knife and took away the suitcase
      having cash amount of Rs.25,00,000/- and mobile of
      peon. Accused no.11 (Kailas Hisalge) got off the
      motorcycle and took the keys of minidoor rickshaw from
      minidoor driver Manoj Ramdas Panap. Thus, all these
      accused have together robbed the articles and cash of
      total amount of Rs.25,21,000/- and ran away to the side
      of Varsai Phata."


6.     Further it is submitted that there is a statement of the

co-accused - Roshan Dayare which is recorded under

Section 18 of MCOC Act in which he has disclosed all facts

in respect of the offence committed by the applicant.

Learned APP submitted that there are as many as six

offences registered against the applicant including the



                                                                4/7
 PMB                                                7.ba.3094-23.doc


present offence. Learned APP submitted that having regard

to the past history of the applicant the applicant does not

deserve to be enlarged on bail.

7.    The chart of the offences registered against the

applicant is at paragraph 17 of the affidavit-in-reply which

indicate that except for the present offence the remaining

five offences registered against the applicant are all bailable

offences. It is pertinent to note that the gang leader has

been enlarged on bail. The prosecution proposes to examine

111 witnesses as per the chart. Learned APP submitted that

it is not as if all the witnesses have been examined.

However considering the nature of the accusations and the

materials on record it is obvious that large number of

witnesses will have to be examined by the prosecution and

the trial is likely to take a long time to conclude.

8.    The applicant was arrested on 26.01.2016 and is now

in custody for more than seven years and nine months as

an under-trial. The trial has not yet commenced. Though

the charge is framed the trial is likely to take a long time to

conclude. Considering that the gang leader has been



                                                              5/7
 PMB                                                  7.ba.3094-23.doc


enlarged on bail and on the ground of long incarceration of

the applicant as an under-trial with no possibility of the trial

concluding any time soon, I am inclined to enlarge the

applicant on bail on conditions. Further the applicant was 21

years of age at the relevant time when this offence was

registered against him. Looking at the nature of the

antecedents certain conditions will have to be imposed but

it is not as if the applicant should be deprived the facility of

bail only on the ground of there being criminal antecedents

reported against him. Hence, the following order :-

                               ORDER

(a) The application is allowed.

(b) The applicant-Sunil @ Chinnu Mahesh Walmiki in connection with FIR bearing C.R. No.I-242 of 2015 registered with Pen Police Station, Raigad shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount.

(c) The applicant shall attend the Investigating Officer of Pen Police Station, Raigad once in a month every first Monday of the month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. 6/7 PMB 7.ba.3094-23.doc

(d) 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 him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer. The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

(e) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.

(f) Except for attending the trial and for the purpose of reporting to the Investigating Officer and for attending to other criminal cases, the applicant shall not enter Raigad District after being released on bail, till the trial concludes.

(g) The applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The applicant shall co-operate with the trial Court and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

9. The application is disposed of.

(M. S. KARNIK, J.) 7/7 Signed by: Pradnya Bhogale Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 03/11/2023 20:10:00