1appln-2238-10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 2238 of 2010 Jitendra Jaywant Khutale and anr vs. The State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr Karan Bhosale, i/by Mr Sanjay Patil for the Applicant. Mr S.N.Gawade, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 22nd JUNE, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions at length on this regular bail application preferred by both the applicants, original accused. They were arrested on 24.12.2009 for committing offences punishable under Sections 364-A, 385 and 387 r.w.section 34 of I.P.C. Allegedly role assigned to the present applicants is that they assisted the main accused who is still absconding in keeping the guard on victim, a person involving in building construction. On the relevant day of 24.12.2009 said victim was accosted, when he was purchasing certain material. Main accused along with his various other associates, totally about more than 12 to 15 persons, gave threat to the said victim and asked him the ransom of Rs.1 lac. His brother was asked to come on the spot and to bring the money. Brother of the victim i.e.the complainant 2appln-2238-10 thereafter reached the spot and he was also threatened of dire consequences and arranging to give ransom of Rs.5 lac per month to a particular person. For making arrangement said complainant left the spot and instead of getting money he went to his advocate and along with advocate he went to the office of Commissioner of Police. Thereafter, the police machinery moved and police officers reached the place where the said victim was kept under surveillance and detained in some room. Allegedly, the persons who were keeping watch on him, were also arrested by the police. As such apparently the first informant had no knowledge as to which were the persons who kept watch on his brother, the victim. However, as per the test identification parade report, copy of which is annexed to the present application and said test identification parade conducted on 16.1.2010 apparently the first informant had identified present applicant No.2 but did not identify the present applicant No.1. Apparently, such type of identification even prima facie cannot further the case of the prosecution so far as the present applicants are concerned. 2. Learned A.P.P drawn attention of this Court towards statement of one witness by name Dinesh Morya. Said statement was recorded after two days of the incident, in which he has mentioned regarding presence of two unknown persons in the company of the victim and police taking custody of all the three persons. However, significantly enough said Dinesh Morya is not called to identify the said two unknown persons though allegedly according to the case of the police those two unknown persons are the present applicants and associates of the main accused. 3. Apart from the above, there is nothing in the investigation papers. The 3appln-2238-10 investigation is already over and charge sheet is already filed. Considering the alleged circumstances against the applicants and considering their custody for more than six months, they can be released on bail on certain conditions. In the result, the following order:- ORDER: (a) Criminal Application No. 2238/2010 is allowed. (b) Both the applicants shall be released on bail in C.R.No.558/2009 registered with Kalamboli Police Station on their executing P.R.bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one surety for the like amount each. (c) In the event of availing bail, the applicants shall attend Kalamboli Police Station once in a week on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m.to 12.00 noon till the conclusion of the trial. 4. Any observations made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. (A.R.JOSHI,J)