1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application (B.A.) No.386/2011 ( Ambadas Gokul Jadhav ..Vs.. The State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Sewagram, Tah. and Distt. Wardha ) With Criminal Application (B.A.) No.391/2011 ( Vishnu s/o Prabhudas Mohite and others ..Vs.. The State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Sewagram, Tah. and Distt. Wardha ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. R.N. Khare, Adv. for applicants. Mr. S.S. Doifode, A.P.P. for respondent/State. CORAM : M.N. GILANI, J. DATED : 27.7.2011. Common order. 1. Both these applications are arising out of the same crime and therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. One Akash Hikre, resident of village Ralegaon, who is a Butcher by profession, is a complainant in this case. On 12/4/2011 at 12 noon, while he was at Warora, Distt. Chandrapur, received a call on his mobile. The person on the other side was Raju Mohite (applicant no.2 in Criminal Application No.391/2011). Said Raju informed him that his father-in-law discovered some treasure consisting of gold and is interested in disposing it of for a cheaper price. The rate was quoted as Rs.5,00,000/- per kilogram. The complainant went to the place called as ‘T’ point at Salod (Hirapur). He had called his nephew with the money. At 4.45 p.m., he collected the bag containing Rs.2,87,000/- from his nephew and accompanied Raju Mohite by 2 Pulgaon road. At a distance of 9 kilometer, near brick kiln, they stopped. One unknown person came to him and showed some gold coins. The complainant was not ready to part away with the bag containing the cash amount unless the gold was shown to him. The said person started pulling the bag. At that time, 6 to 7 strangers came there in a Sumo vehicle. He started running through the field. He was chased by them and caught. They disclosed that they were the Police Officers. A bag containing cash amount and his mobile was snatched. He returned to Salod ‘T’ point. Because of the incident, he was very much frightened and shocked. Therefore, the report was lodged on 14/4/2011 in the police station Sewagarm. 3. In Criminal Application No.391/2011, the applicant No.3 Harilal Chavan has filed pursis, bearing Stamp No.1597/2011, stating that he wants to withdraw the application. The Criminal Application No.391/2011, so far as it relates to applicant no.3 Hiralal Chavan, is dismissed as withdrawn. 4. The contents in the FI.R., as reproduced above, point out the involvement of applicants Vishnu, Raju and Ambadas. 5. The reply filed by learned A.P.P. shows that on 14/4/2011, the applicant Vishnu, Raju and Ambadas were arrested. In the identification parade, the complainant identified the applicant no.1 Vishnu, applicant no.2 Raju and applicant no.3 Harilal. The cash amount of Rs.10,000/- and mobile was recovered at the instance of applicant – Ambadas (in Criminal Application No.386/2011). The cash amount of Rs.10,000/- and mobile, Rs. 43,000/- and Rs.74,000/- and mobile have been discovered at the instance of applicants Vishnu Mohite, Raju Mohite and Harilal Chavan, respectively. 3 6. As regards applicant Ambadas (in Criminal Application No.386/2011), he has been identified by the complainant in an identification parade and was arrested on 14/4/2011. The cash amount of Rs.10,000/- is also recovered at his instance. 7. Learned counsel for the applicants contends that there was inordinate delay in holding the identification parade, the chargesheet has been submitted, there was delay in lodging the F.I.R. and therefore, prayer for releasing the applicants on bail may be considered. 8. The identification parade was held on 19/5/2011. That means it was held within about a month. It will be the matter of appreciation of evidence as to whether such a delay is fatal to the prosecution case. 9. This is the case where the offence was committed after proper planning and with due deliberation. The complainant was informed about the discovery of gold by the father-in-law of the accused Raju Mohite. Then he was asked to come at the particular place and the bag containing amount of Rs.2,87,000/- was snatched from him. The prima facie case against the applicant nos.1 and 2 – Vishnu Mohite and Raju Mohite, respectively - (in Criminal Application No.391/2011) as well as against applicant Ambadas (in Criminal Application No.386/2011) is made out. In that light of the matter, learned Additional Sessions Judge was right in rejecting the bail application. 10. Criminal Application Nos.386/2011 and 391/2011 are rejected. JUDGE Tambaskar.