jpc ba708-11.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 708 OF 2011 Enam Mukhatarali Pirbhai Choudhary... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. K. R. Iyengar, for the applicant Mr. Pradeep Gharat, Special PP for the CBI Mrs. S. D. Shinde, APP for the State CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 26th July, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Iyengar, the learned advocate for the applicant, Mr. Gharat, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the CBI and Mrs. Shinde, learned APP for the State, at length. However, in the view that I am taking, it is not necessary to mention the rival contentions in depth. 2. Mr. Gharat emphasises the fact that the applicant was absconding. Mr. Iyengar submits that the applicant was not served with any notice/summons requiring him to appear before the investigating agency, at any stage. According to him, the applicant was abroad and when he returned to India in March, 2011, he was apprehended by the investigating agency. jpc ba708-11.sxw 2 3. Without going into the question as to whether the applicant was aware of the proceedings and whether he had absconded, what may be observed is that the trial of the case against the co-accused is coming to an end. After the applicant was arrested, he was produced before the trial court and joined in the said trial. The applicant stated that he did not want any of the witnesses already examined by the prosecution, to be recalled for cross examination. These facts are not in dispute. 4. I am informed that all the other accused in this case have already been released by the Special Court, on their executing personal bonds. Mr. Gharat submits that they were so released but, that they were in custody for a number of years. However, the fact remains that the Court has found it fit to release them on their executing personal bonds, though the case was kept for judgment. 5. I am also informed that there is no notification issued by the State, empowering any Judge to proceed with the trial of the case. I am informed that, therefore, the trial has come to a standstill. Mr. Gharat informs that the prosecution would be examining only five witnesses against the present applicant and he expects the trial to be over within a period of three months. He states that the notification, appointing a Judge for the trial of the Case, is expected to be received within two weeks. jpc ba708-11.sxw 3 6. The passport of the applicant has already been seized by the investigating agency. Under the circumstances, the applicant may be released on bail on imposing proper conditions. 7. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with one surety in like amount, on the condition that the applicant shall report to the office of C.B.I., EOW, Mumbai, every day between 3 p.m. to 5 p.m., except on Sundays and Holidays, till disposal of the case against him. 8. The applicant shall not leave the local limits of Brihanmumbai, except with the express permission of the Investigating Officer or the Court. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)