{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1560 OF 2010 Rajendra s/o Sukhadeo Chavan APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for the applicant Mr. D.V.Tele, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 16 th June 2010 PER COURT: 1. The applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.577/2008 registered with Tophkhana police station for an offence punishable u/s 397 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. It is informed that the applicant was already arrested in connection with CR No.276/2009 registered with Rahuri police station on 03.12.2009. 3. It appears that the present offence is registered with Tophkhana police station on the complaint of one Prakash Sawant {2} in respect of an incident of dacoity, which has occurred at his house on 30th December 2008. One more complaint in respect of incident dated 11th October 2009 is registered with Rahuri police station on the complaint of one Santosh. After arrest of the applicant, it is revealed that as his whereabouts were traced on the basis of IMEI number of the mobile handset, which was in his possession to which he has contended that he found the handset in abandon condition and he picked up it from there and is using the same. However, this handset has nothing to do with the present offence. 4. It appears that on 9th June 2010, custody of the applicant was demanded on transfer warrant in connection with CR No.577/2008. Within mean time, he was released on bail in connection with CR No.276/2010 in which he was earlier apprehended while tracing the IEMI number of the handset. 5. In this case, after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed and thereafter, the trial is committed to the Court of sessions and numbered as Sessions Case No.223/2009. 6. Perusal of the papers of investigation discloses that Test Identification Parade was conducted on 19th March 2010 in the Central Jail, Ahmednagar. It is pertinent to note that though huge property was stolen during the robbery, nothing is recovered at the instance of the applicant, though he was identified by the {3} complainant in CR No.577/2008 so also by the wife of the said complainant. One cannot be oblivious of the fact that even in the supplementary statement of the complainant, no role is attributed to the applicant. In the premise, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail, however on certain condition. 7. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant be enlarged on bail, if not required in any other offence, on his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and on executing PR bond. The applicant is directed not to leave the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court, Ahmednagar, without previous permission in writing from the concerned court or the IO, till disposal of the trial against him. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln1560-10