Bombay High Court
Suryakant Shriram Mule vs The State Of Maharashtra on 8 September, 2020
Author: V. K. Jadhav
Bench: V. K. Jadhav
1 938-BA.884-20.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
938 BAIL APPLICATION NO.884 OF 2020
SURYAKANT SHRIRAM MULE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Abhinay Dilip Khot (appointed)
APP for Respondent-State : Mr. S. P. Sonpawale.
...
CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.
DATE : 08.09.2020
PER COURT :-
1. The applicant is a under trial prisoner in connection with
Special (MCOCA) Case No.2 of 2016, State Vs. Gorakh and
others. In terms of the guidelines issued by the High Power
Committee dated 11.05.2020 and the subsequent guidelines,
the applicant is seeking the temporary bail. His application at
Exh.170, under Section 439 of the Cr. P. C. came to be rejected
by the Special Judge (MCOCA), Aurangabad, by order dated
22.07.2020.
2. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
applicant is in jail since 22.11.2015. Though the trial has been
commenced, however, the prosecution could able to examine
only four witnesses out of 101 witnesses, as cited in the
::: Uploaded on - 09/09/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2020 03:42:09 :::
2 938-BA.884-20.odt
charge-sheet. The learned counsel submits that it is not certain
as to when the trial would be concluded. The applicant may
be released on temporary bail. The applicant is ready to
furnish surety. The learned counsel submits that in the
alternate, the Trial Court may be directed to dispose off the
case in expeditious manner after the normalcy is restored.
3. The learned APP has strongly resisted the application on
the ground that the Investigating Officer has collected
sufficient material against the applicant and the co-accused.
Prima facie, there is evidence that applicant is the Member of
organized gang and if he is enlarged on bail, the applicant is
likely to commit the similar offences or he may abscond. The
learned APP submits that the Trial Court has rightly rejected
the application Exh.170. No case is made out to grant
temporary bail. The application is liable to be rejected.
4. On going through the allegations made in the complaint
and on perusal of the investigation papers, it appears that there
is a strong prima facie case against the applicant. Though the
progress of the trial is little bit slow due to the out break of
pandemic, however, care can be taken by giving the suitable
directions to the Trial Court to dispose off the case, as
::: Uploaded on - 09/09/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2020 03:42:09 :::
3 938-BA.884-20.odt
expeditiously as possible, on priority basis after the normalcy is
restored. I am in agreement with the observations made by the
Trial Court that if the applicant is released on bail, there are
chances of repetition of similar crime in future or that he may
abscond. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order :
ORDER
1. The application is hereby rejected.
2. The Trial Court is hereby directed to dispose off the pending Special (MCOCA) Case No.2 of 2016, as expeditiously as possible, on priority basis, after the normal court functioning begins.
3. Since Mr. Abhinay Dilip Khot, learned counsel is appointed to prosecute the cause of the applicant, his fees be paid as per the schedule of fees maintained by the High Court Legal Services, Sub- Committee, Aurangabad.
4. The application is accordingly disposed off.
(V. K. JADHAV, J.) ...
vmk/-
::: Uploaded on - 09/09/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2020 03:42:09 :::