IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.APPLICATION NO.3314 OF 2008 CRI.APPLICATION NO.3314 OF 2008 CRI.APPLICATION NO.3314 OF 2008 Shri Devidas Baulal Chavan, .. Applicant Vs State of Maharashtra, .. Respondent. Mr.Niranjan Mundargi, for the applicant. Ms A.T.Jhaveri, APP, for the respondent. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. DATE : 17/11/2008 DATE : 17/11/2008 DATE : 17/11/2008 PC: PC: PC: 1. Heard Mr Mundargi, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms.Jhaveri, learned APP, for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in C.R.No.I-37 of 2006 of Yewla Taluka police station, Nashik. The said crime has been registered against the applicant and 17 others for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 420, 395, 397 and 427 of IPC. It is on the allegations that the applicant had represented to the complainant that some gold was found while digging the land and the person, who found the gold was prepared to sell it to the complainant at half the price of the gold. On 6.4.2006 the complainant and his associates raised an amount of Rs.three lacs and went with the present applicant to a particular spot, where they were attacked by 15-20 persons and looted the amount carried by the complainant. According to the prosecution, taking the complainant to the particular spot and the attack by 15-20 persons, that was all pre-planned. It appears that all other accused in the present case have already been released on bail. They were in custody for about 2-5 months. The present applicant was absconding and came to be arrested only on 20.4.2008. In the test identification parade he came to be identified by the complainant and the other witnesses. The prayer for bail has been opposed solely on the ground that the applicant does not have permanent place of residence. Mr Mundargi, learned counsel for the applicant, however, submitted that the applicant has a permanent place of residence, as mentioned in the title of the application. He submitted that he may be put to strict conditions and that he is also prepared to furnish local sureties. Having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case and considering that all other accused have already been released on bail and that the applicant is in custody since last six months, I am inclined to enlarge him on bail. It is pertinent to note that the applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. Hence, the following order. 3. The applicant to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two local sureties to make up the said amount, out of which one surety would be his close relative having permanent residence in district-Nashik, subject to condition that he shall report to the concerned police station every Wednesday and Saturday between 7 and 8 pm till conclusion of the trial. . While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case without being influenced by the observations made in this order. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)