:1: :1: :1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR BAIL) NO. 1367 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1215 OF 2007 Bhawarlal Phoosaram Choudhary ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and anr. ....Respondents CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR BAIL) NO. 1368 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1216 OF 2007 Sohanlal Bhawarlal Choudhary .....Petitioner Versus Union of India and anr. ....Respondents CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR BAIL) NO. 1369 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1217 OF 2007 Ajaysingh Maganlal Anjana ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and anr. ....Respondents Ayaz Khan with Nilofur Sayyed Adv. for the petitioners. R.F.Lambey Adv. for respondent no.1. A.S.Shitole, APP for state. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 15th January, 2008. :2: :2: :2: P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. These three applications are by the original accused who have been convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment in N.D.P.S. Special cases. 2. The sentence imposed is Rigourous Imprisonment for ten years alongwith fine under each of the provisions referred to, more particularly, in the judgment and order dated 26.10.2007. 3. Each of the applicants has been in custody from June 2001 till date. 4. Reliance has been placed upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Mansingh vs. Mansingh vs. Mansingh vs. Union Union Union of India reported in (2006) 1 SCC (Cri0 279 of India reported in (2006) 1 SCC (Cri0 279 of India reported in (2006) 1 SCC (Cri0 279 and an order passed by his Lordship Justice Marlapalle on 31.10.2007 in Cri.Application No. 981 of 2007 in Cri.Appeal No. 162 of 2007. :3: :3: :3: 5. The judgments which have been relied upon in support of the applications are delivered in cases under the N.D.P.S. Act. The principle laid down is that if the applicant has undergone substantial part of the sentence already and the Appeals are not likely to be heard in the near future, then,their case deserves to be considered sympathetically. 6. The factual position with regard to the period of custody of these applicants has not been disputed by Mr.Lambey. However, his submission is that in the matter before Justice Marlapalle, there was no direction to hear the Appeal expeditiously or have the paper-books prepared for that purpose. Secondly, the prosecution is intending to carry the matter further from the order passed by Justice Marlapalle. 7. This submission of Mr. Lambey cannot be accepted for the simple reason that, the factual position having not been disputed by the prosecution, the principle would be squarely applicable. The applicants have undergone more than six years of custody. In such circumstances, they deserve to be enlarged on bail. :4: :4: :4: Hence the following order. O R D E R . The applicants be enlarged on bail of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the lke amount. . The applicants shall remain present before this Court, when the Criminal Appeals are placed for hearing and final disposal. . The applicants shall report to the Narcotics Control Bureau once in a fortnight till the appeals are heard and disposed off. . The passports, if any, of the applicants shall be handed over to the Investigation Agencies. :5: :5: :5: . The applicants shall not without prior permission of this court leave India. At the request of Mr.Lambay, this order is stayed for a period of eight weeks. . All the Criminal Applications stand disposed off. sd/- ******