IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.550 OF 2008. APPLICATION NO.550 OF 2008. APPLICATION NO.550 OF 2008. Sudhakar Waman Ahire ...Applicant Versus. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Shri Ashok Mundargi, Sr Advocate with Shri Prakash Wagh for the Applicant. Shri S.P.Peanekar, A.P.P for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ABHAY S.OKA, J. : ABHAY S.OKA, J. : ABHAY S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 17th MARCH, 2008. : 17th MARCH, 2008. : 17th MARCH, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties were heard on 13th March, 2008. In view of order dated 26th February, 2008, this application has been assigned to this Court in accordance with the general directions issued by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice on 29th February, 2008. 2. The applicant has been prosecuted for offences punishable under section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The applications for bail made earlier by the present applicant have been rejected by this Court by orders dated 04th July, 2005, 19th June, 2005 and 15th March, 2006. In the last order dated 15th March, 2007 passed in Criminal Application No.281 of 2007, this court has observed thus: : 2 : 2 : 2 : "Now the trial has commenced and the complainant is already under cross-examination. As of today, it cannot be said that there is a material change in circumstances or fact situation which requires the earlier view being interfered with. Therefore, as of today, considering the gravity of allegations against the Applicant, no case is made out for grant of bail. If the trial which is already commenced is not concluded in a reasonable time, it will be always open for the Applicant to apply for bail afresh". 3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant has placed on record a certified copy of the roznama of the case. The roznama shows that the trial commenced on 17th March, 2006 with the examination-in-chief of the first witness of the prosecution. The roznama shows that the recording of evidence of the first witness for prosecution ended on 28th November, 2007 and it is pointed out that now the examination of the second prosecution witness is in progress. The learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that applicant is in custody from 26th June, 2004 i.e for last about three and half years and the maximum punishment which can be imposed is seven : 3 : 3 : 3 : years. He submitted that in view of sub-section 6 of section 437 of the Code, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. The learned A.P.P invited my attention to the earlier orders passed by this Court and submitted that looking to the gravity of the allegations against the applicant, no case was made out for enlarging the applicant on bail. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions. In a petition filed by the co-accused, by order dated 08th January, 2007 the Apex Court has directed the trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of six months from that date. It is borne out from the roznama and it is not disputed by the learned A.P.P that though the trial commenced on 17th March, 2006 as of today recording of evidence of only one witness out of total 54 prosecution witnesses has been completed. It is not in dispute that at present the second witness of the prosecution is in the box. As pointed out earlier there are total 54 witnesses cited by the prosecution. It is obvious that the way trial has progressed from 17th March, 2006 it is not likely that the trial will be over in near future. Period of six months from the date of commencement of the trial has expired long back. 5. In order dated 15th March, 2007 passed on the last bail application filed by the applicant, this Court : 4 : 4 : 4 : has noted that the trial had commenced and the complainant was under cross-examination. Though this Court rejected the prayer for bail, a liberty was granted to the applicant to apply for bail in the event the trial is not concluded in reasonable time. As of today, the trial has not concluded and there is no reasonable chance of conclusion of the trial in the near future. The fact that after the last order was passed on 15th March, 2007 the trial has virtually made no progress brings about a substantial change in the fact situation necessitating interference with the earlier view taken by this Court. Now the applicant has already spend 3 years and 6 months in custody and maximum punishment can be of seven years. Still more than 50 witnesses of the prosecution are to be examined. Considering the manner in which the trial has progressed, a case is made out for enlarging the applicant on bail subject to compliance with stringent terms and conditions. 6. Hence, I pass the following order: i) The Applicant shall be enlarged on bail in connection with F.I.R.No.148 of 2004 (Criminal F.I.R.No.148 of 2004 (Criminal F.I.R.No.148 of 2004 (Criminal Case Case Case No.325/PW/2004) No.325/PW/2004) No.325/PW/2004) registered with D.B.Marg D.B.Marg D.B.Marg Police Police Police Station, Mumbai Station, Mumbai Station, Mumbai subject to furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- Rs.50,000/- Rs.50,000/- with : 5 : 5 : 5 : two sureties in the like amount. ii) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the applicant will report to DCB CID, Unit 3 DCB CID, Unit 3 DCB CID, Unit 3 at at at Worli on every Monday at 11.00 a.m. Worli on every Monday at 11.00 a.m. Worli on every Monday at 11.00 a.m. iii) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement or threat to any prosecution witnesses and shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence. iii) The Applicant shall co-operate with the learned Trial Judge for expeditious disposal of the trial. Any attempt by the Applicant to delay the trial may be a ground for cancellation of bail. iv) The order granting bail will be given effect only after the applicant surrenders his pass-port, if any, to DCB CID, Unit 3, Worli. v) Application is disposed of in above terms. vi) The parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. : 6 : 6 : 6 : Judge. Judge. Judge.