Bombay High Court
Shailesh Gunvantrai Maniar vs State Of Maharashtra on 2 April, 2024
Author: Madhav J. Jamdar
Bench: Madhav J. Jamdar
2024:BHC-AS:16487
01-BA-2386-2023 (S).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.2386 OF 2023
Shailesh Gunvantrai Maniar ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
_______________________________________________________________
Ms. Meghna Gowalani, for the Applicant.
Mr. Amit Palkar, APP, for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Anilkumar B. Gadivadd, SDPO-Kolhapur, present.
_______________________________________________________________
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED: 02nd APRIL 2024
P.C.:
1. Heard Ms. Gowalani, learned Counsel for the Applicant and Mr.
Palkar, learned APP for the Respondent-State.
2. This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("CrPC"). The relevant details are
as follows:-
1 C. R. No. 136 of 2019
2 Date of registration of F.I.R. 09/04/2019
3 Name of Police Station Rajarampuri, District-Kolhapur
4 Section/s invoked 143, 147, 149, 395, 307, 353, 332,
155, 109, 324, 323 & 427 of the
I.P.C., 1860;
4 & 5 of the Maharashtra
Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887;
65(e) of the Bombay Prohibition
Act, 1949;
37 & 135 of the Bombay Police Act,
Arjun Page No. 1
::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2024 17:32:43 :::
01-BA-2386-2023 (S).doc
1951.
5 Date of incident 08/04/2019
6 Date of arrest 14/06/2019
7 Date of filing Charge-sheet 05/10/2019
3. The prosecution case is set out in paragraph No.3 of Order dated
19th January 2024 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.1904 of 2023
of co-Accused, which is reproduced hereunder for reference:-
" 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 8 th April, 2019,
raid was conducted at Matka Den of accused no.26 Salim
Yasim Mulla. While police were recording panchanama,
accused no.1 (wife of accused no.26) instigated other accused
who attacked the police and attempted to commit murder,
prevented the police from performing their duty, and, tried to
snatch the cash from the police which was seized from the
house of accused Nos.1 and 26. About 29 accused were
arrested. Accused no.26 and others were members of
organized crime syndicate indulging in continuous unlawful
activity. The kingpin of the gang was accused no.26, Salim
Yasim Mulla. Various cases were registered against him such
as dacoity, extortion, unlawful business of betting, attempt to
commit murder etc. During the course of investigation, it was
revealed that accused no.26 Salim Yasim Mulla used to sent
money received from illegal Matka business and acquired
huge property out of the proceeds received from the illegal
Matka business. Accused no.30 Rakesh Agarwal, 31 Zakir
Abdul Mirajkar, 32 Ankush Maruti Vagre, 33 Sarad Devasrao
Korane, 36 Jayesh Shevantilal Shah, 37 Shailesh Gunvantirai
Maniyar, 38, Viral Prakash Sawla, 39 Jitendra Kantilal
Gosalia, 40 Jayesh Sawla, 41 Rajendra Dave, 42 Manish
Kishor Agarwal, 43 Samrat Subhash Korane and 44 Prakash
Sawla facilitated the other accused particularly accused no.26
Salim Mulla for committing the organise crime. They were
members of organised crime syndicate headed by accused
no.26 Salim Mulla. During personal search of the applicant,
mobile hand set of the applicant was seized under arrest
panchanama. On completing investigation, charge-sheet was
filed. "
Arjun Page No. 2
::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2024 17:32:43 :::
01-BA-2386-2023 (S).doc
4. At the outset, Ms. Gowalani, learned Counsel for the Applicant
submitted that there are a total of 44 Accused persons and 26 out of
them have been enlarged on bail. She submitted that the Applicant was
arrested on 14th June 2019 and he is incarcerated since almost 4 years
and 10 months. She submitted that although the Charges have been
framed on 19th October 2022, there is no further progress in the trial
and not even a single witness has been examined. She heavily relied on
the Order dated 19th January 2024 passed by a learned Single Judge
[Prakash D. Naik J.] in Criminal Bail Application No.1904 of 2023. Ms.
Gowalani, learned Counsel submitted that the Applicant is incarcerated
since 4 years and 10 months and that there is no progress in the trial
and therefore there is a violation of the Applicant's fundamental right to
speedy trial. He, therefore seeks that the Applicant be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Palkar, learned APP strongly opposed the
Bail Application. He submitted that the Charge-sheet has been filed on
5th October 2019 and the learned Trial Court has issued the process. He
submitted that the delay in trial is attributed to the Applicant.
6. The factual position on record shows that Charges were framed
on 19th October 2022. Thereafter, the prosecution filed the list of
witnesses on 14th August 2023 i.e. after about 10 months. The witness
summons were issued on 6th February 2024 and 7th February 2024.
Although the witness summons remained un-served, no steps were
Arjun Page No. 3
::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2024 17:32:43 :::
01-BA-2386-2023 (S).doc
taken to ensure the presence of witnesses for more than five hearings.
As per the list of witnesses filed by the prosecution on 14th August
2023, there are a total of 140 witnesses proposed to be examined by the
prosecution. Accordingly, the trial will take a considerably long time to
conclude.
7. Speedy trial is one of the facets of right to life and liberty
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Speedy trial is
an essential ingredient of "reasonable, fair and just" procedure
guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the
State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the
Accused.1 Therefore, the Applicant is entitled for bail.
8. Ms. Gowalani, learned Counsel for the Applicant relied on the
decision of the Supreme Court of India in Rabi Prakash v. State of
Odisha2 and more particularly on paragraph Nos.3 and 4 therein. The
said paragraph Nos.3 and 4 read as under:-
"3. We are informed that the trial has commenced but
only 1 out of the 19 witnesses has been examined. The
conclusion of trial will, thus, take some more time.
4. As regard to the twin conditions contained in Section
37 of the NDPS Act, learned counsel for the respondent -
State has been duly heard. Thus, the 1 st condition stands
complied with. So far as the 2nd condition re: formation of
opinion as to whether there are reasonable grounds to believe
that the petitioner is not guilty, the same may not be formed
at this stage when he has already spent more than three and a
half years in custody. The prolonged incarceration, generally
militates against the most precious fundamental right
1 Hussainara Khatoon (IV) v. Home Secy., State of Bihar, (1980) 1 SCC 98
2 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1109
Arjun Page No. 4
::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2024 17:32:43 :::
01-BA-2386-2023 (S).doc
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a
situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory
embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act."
9. Ms. Gowalani, learned Counsel has also heavily relied on the said
Order dated 19th January 2024 passed by a learned Single Judge
[Prakash D. Naik, J.] in the case of the co-Accused Rajendra @ Raju
Dharamsi Dave v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police & Anr. in
Criminal Bail Application No.1904 of 2023. Paragraph No.7 of the said
Order reads as under:-
"7. The applicant is in custody for a period of about 4 and
half years. Although charge is framed on 19.10.2021, there is
no progress in the trial. The prosecution has provided the list
of 140 witnesses. Learned A.P.P. submitted that the
prosecution may examine about 60 witnesses. This indicates
that the trial may not get over immediately. There are no
criminal antecedents against the applicant. The applicant was
not involved in assault. The co-accused are granted bail by
this Court vide order dated 8th February, 2023. The embargo
under Section 21(4) of the MCOC Act would not be an
impediment to grant bail."
10. Considering the above position, a case for granting of bail is
made out.
11. It is an admitted position that investigation has been completed
and that Charge-sheet has been filed on 05th October 2019. Although
charges have been framed on 19th October 2022 there is no further
progress in the trial and not a single witness is examined. As per the list
of witnesses, prosecution is proposed to examine about 140 witnesses.
The trial is likely to take a considerably long time.
Arjun Page No. 5
::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2024 17:32:43 :::
01-BA-2386-2023 (S).doc
12. The Applicant does not appear to be at risk of flight.
13. Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing
conditions.
14. In view thereof, the following order:-
ORDER
(a) The Applicant-Shailesh Gunvantrai Maniar be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.136 of 2019 registered with the Rajarampuri Police Station, District-Kolhapur on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two local solvent sureties in the like amount.
(b) On being released on bail, the Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto.
(c) The Applicant shall report to the Rajarampuri Police Station, District-Kolhapur once in a month i.e. on the first Sunday of every month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. until the conclusion of the trial.
(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 such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.
(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner.
(f) The Applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The Applicant shall co-operate with the Trial Court and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments thereat.
Arjun Page No. 6 ::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2024 17:32:43 :::01-BA-2386-2023 (S).doc
(g) The Applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer.
15. The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Arjun Page No. 7 ::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2024 17:32:43 :::