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 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 865 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 865 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 865 OF 2009 1. Pradeep Chandrakant Vazare, 2. Mohan Khanderao More, 3. Ramesh Sukhdeo Salunkhe, 4. Rakesh Gopala Pardeshi, 5. Gafarsheikh Mehboob Shaikh, 6. Vijay Ashok Ahire, 7. Jai Dhansinh Kotwal, 8. Gokul Shankar Nagare, 9. Sunil Dattatraya Lonari, 10. Pankaj Balasaheb Wani, 11. Ankush Arun Pawar, 12. Ketan Rajendra Dighe, 13. Sanjay Pundalik Dandgavhal, 14. Deepak Maruti Chavan, 15. Sagar Maruti Shiral, 16. Sunil @ Bhavdya Pralhad Bharti, 17. Hrishikesh Vinod Choudhary, 18. Gorakh Baburao Aher, 19. Manoj Dattatray Ghodke, 20. Pramod Vasant Dangare, 21. Jagdish Chintaman Patil ...Applicants vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.A.P. Mundargi, Sr.Counsel i/b. Mr.S.K. Shinde with Mr.Sandeep Shinde for the Applicants. Mr.Rajesh More, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 27, 2009 DATED : FEBRUARY 27, 2009 DATED : FEBRUARY 27, 2009 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the applicants and the learned APP for the State. - 2 - 2. The applicants have been arrested in connection with an offence punishable under Sections 143, 145, 147, 148, 149, 436, 353, 322, 427, 345, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act vide C.R.No.23/2009. The applicants were arrested on 26th January, 2009, It is alleged that a cultural programme of Bhojpuri songs was arranged in Municipal School No.95 and 96 of Maharashtra Housing Colony, Nashik. It is alleged that the applicant no.1 came in a Santro car followed by other workers of Maharashtra Nav Nirman Sena and they ransacked the stage and abused audience in filthy language and told the organisers to sing Marathi song and not Bhojpuri song. The applicants were arrested at the spot. Admitted position is that only one person was injured in the stampede. The applicants are remanded to police custody till 2nd February, 2009 which was thereafter extended. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicants submits that grounds of the offences are bailable offences and the investigation in the case was over. He submitted - 3 - that even in the remand application, custody of the applicants was not required and that it was not so stated so in the remand application. It was stated that for certain other things which were to be performed by the police such as taking out copies, the remand was sought by the Investigating Officer. He submitted that at that time, one of the accused was yet to be arrested and that now he also has been arrested and therefore, the custodial interrogation of the applicants is not necessary. 4. The learned APP for the State pointed out that investigation of the case is over after taking instructions from the Investigating Officer who is present in the Court. He submitted that the statements of 33 witnesses have already been recorded. He expressed apprehension that the applicants may threaten the witnesses. He also pointed out that against some of the applicants, there were prior antecedents of a similar nature. He, therefore, submitted that strict conditions may be imposed on the present applicants in order to ensure that they do not tamper with the - 4 - evidence. He submitted that the charge-sheet was likely to be filed within a short time. 5. There cannot be any manner of doubt regarding the action of the applicants in damaging public property and abusing the people who are attending the cultural programme at the Municipal School is depicable. Such kind of practices are deprecable. However, in the present case, since the applicants are in custody for more than one month, the question is whether their continued detention in jail is necessary particularly, when the investigating is over. However, there is some substance in the apprehension expressed by the learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. Admittedly, only one person was injured in the stampede and apart from abusing audience and threatening the organisers of the function, property which was damaged in the said incident was to the tune of about Rs.25,000/-. Therefore, under these circumstances, the applicants will have to be released on bail subject to certain strict conditions being imposed on them. A chart of antecedents shown against applicant nos.1, 2 and 4 by - 5 - the learned APP indicates that most of the applicants have committed offences under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and under Section 323 which are bailable offence. 6. Under the circumstances, the applicants be released on bail in the sum of Rs.5000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount for the aforesaid offences. The applicants, however, shall not enter the Nashik City till the filing of the charge-sheet. They shall give their new residential address to the Superintendent of Jail prior to their release and shall report to the nearest police station from new their residence once in a week. The applicants shall, after the charge-sheet is filed, report to the Satpur Police Station, Nashik City, once in a month. The applicants, however, shall not threaten any of the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. It is made clear that if any complaint is received and there is any breach of the conditions imposed by this Court, the bail granted to the applicants may be cancelled on an - 6 - application being made by the police. 7. The application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)