1 crap3099.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3099 OF 2011 Santosh s/o Sukhdev Waykar ...Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, through District Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar and anr. ...Respondent ..... Shri A.B.Gaikwad, advocate for applicant Shri G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 18th August, 2011 PER COURT : 1 Heard respective learned counsel for the parties. 2 This is an application preferred by the applicant seeking bail in connection with C.R. No. I-40 of 2011, registered at Kopargaon police station, District Ahmednagar, for the 2 crap3099.11 offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The investigation papers were made available by the learned A.P.P. for perusal. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant, namely Sachin Mulik on 7.2.2011. It is alleged in the said complaint that while complainant and his friends, namely Manish Vijay Vishwakarma, Sani Lalitkumar Warma, Anchit Ashok Agrawal and Pawan Babulal Ichhariya were proceeding towards Shirdi- Shani Shinganapur by Hyundai Accent Car, bearing registration No. MP-09/T-0727, belonging to Sunil Subhash Mulik i.e. brother of the complainant and after taking darshan at Shirdi and Shani Shinganapur, when they were returning towards their town via Yeola road through Kopargaon Taluka, at about 9.30 p.m., some assailants on three motor cycles arrived there and assaulted them and took out the articles, currency notes, driving licenses and mobile phones from their persons forcibly and fled away along with the said Hyundai Car and robbed articles. 3 crap3099.11 4 On the said background, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail. Moreover, the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, and therefore, it is submitted that there is no propriety in keeping the applicant in custody further more. It is also submitted that name of the applicant has not been disclosed in the first information report and there is no discovery at the instance of the applicant. It is also canvassed that the alleged discovery of bag containing clothes and Pulsar motor cycle at the instance of the applicant is not the substantive piece of evidence. Hence, it is urged that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5 Learned A.P.P. countered the said arguments and opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that during the course of investigation, statements of eye witnesses, namely Gorakh and Sandip have been recorded and the said statements establish that the applicant herein came by four wheeler Hyundai Car and left by motor cycle after commission of the crime. It is also canvassed by the learned A.P.P. that as many as 29 offences have been registered against the 4 crap3099.11 applicant and he is a seasoned criminal and habitual offender. Moreover, it is submitted that Pulsar motor cycle and bag containing clothes were discovered at the instance of the applicant under memorandum panchanama, dated 7.2.2011. It is further submitted that the supplementary statement of complainant Sachin Mulik was recorded and he has identified the bag containing clothes, which were discovered at the instance of the applicant herein under memorandum panchanama. It is further submitted that the applicant was detained for the period of two years i.e. from 2007 to 2009 under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 and there is proposal to apply the provisions of the MOCCA against the applicant, considering his criminal activities. Accordingly, learned A.P.P. urged that present application deserves to be rejected. 6 Considering the rival submissions and after perusal of the investigation papers, at the out set, the statements of eye witnesses i.e. Sandip Bhuse and Gorakh disclose the name of the applicant herein as one of the assailants and burglar. 5 crap3099.11 Moreover, the bag containing clothes and Pulsar motor cycle were discovered at the instance of the applicant herein under the memorandum panchanama dated 7.2.2011 and the supplementary statement of the complainant Sachin Mulik discloses that he identified the said bag, as his bag containing clothes, which was kept in the Hyundai Accent Car at the time of afore said robbery, and apparently, said piece of evidence is incriminating against the applicant herein. Moreover, the supplementary statements of friends of the complainant, namely Manish Vishwakarma, Sani Warma and Anchit Agarwal also disclose that they identified their clothes which were discovered at the instance of the applicant herein under the memorandum panchanama and the said piece of evidence also amounts to incriminating evidence against the applicant herein. 7 Besides that, learned Additional Public Prosecutor pointed out that as many as 29 offences have been registered against the applicant herein under various Sections of the Indian Penal Code as enlisted herein below. 6 crap3099.11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sr. Police C.R. No. Offence u/Sec. Present No. Station (I.P.C.) stage ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Shrirampur City 15/2000 457,380,511 Pending 2 -”- 58/2000 461, 380 -”- 3 -” - 60/2000 461,380 -”- 4 -” - 68/2000 379 -”- 5 Shrirampur Tq. 63/2000 457,380 -”- 6 -” - 79/2000 457,380 -”- 7 -” - 83/2000 457,380 -”- 8 -”- 91/2000 394,341 -”- 9 Shrirampur City 71/2000 457,380 -”- 10 Kopargaon 141/2002 394,457,342,34 -”- 11 Rahata 73/2002 394,34 -”- 12 Parner 216/2002 379 -”- 13 Vavi, Dist.Nasik 131/2002 399,402,307,353,427 -”- 14 Shrirampur Tq. 23/2005 399 & 4/25 ArmsAct -”- 15 Kopargaon 13/2006 392, 457 -”- 16 Shirdi 60/2006 395, 397 -”- 17 Rahata 86/2006 394, 216 (A), 34 -”- 18 Shrirampur Tq. 127/2007 143,147,148,149, 7 crap3099.11 435 & 135 BPAct -”- 19 -”- 11/2008 392, 34 -”- 20 Sarkarwada 46/2008 379 -”- Nasik City 21 Jawaharnaar 46/2008 379 -”- Aurangabad City 22 Rahata 34/2008 307,34 & 4/25 Arms Act -”- 23 Jinsi 65/2008 399, 402 Aurangabad City & 4/25 Arms Act -”- 24 Shrirampur City 314/2010 392 -”- 25 Kopargaon 40/2011 395 -”- 26 -”- 55/2011 394,457,342,34 -”- 27 -”- 4/2011 295, 427, 120 (B) -”- 28 Loni Kalbhor 57/2011 379, 34 -”- Dist. Pune 29 Panchwati 94/2011 379 under District Nasik investigation 8 Moreover, it is also pointed out that the applicant was detained under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and 8 crap3099.11 Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 for the period of two years i.e. 2007 to 2009 and proposal for application of provisions of MOCCA has been moved against the applicant herein, considering criminal activities of the applicant and the said aspects cannot be overlooked. 9 Moreover, apprehension is posed by the learned A.P.P. that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he may influence upon the witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, considering his earlier checkered criminal history and the said apprehension cannot be overlooked and ignored. 10 In the circumstances, present application bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits, and therefore, same stands dismissed. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap3099.11