1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 175 /2011 (Balkrushna Babanrao Gawhankar vs. State of Maharashtra ) .................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... CORAM : A.P.BHANGALE, J. DATED : 15th April, 2011. Heard Mr. R.M.Patwardhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr S S Doifode, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State. By this application, the applicant prayed for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 214/2009 reported at Sitabuldi Police Station, Nagpur, for offence punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120-B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which gave rise to Regular Criminal Case No. 4122/2009 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.2, Nagpur. It is the grievance of the applicant that despite a specific direction by this Court pursuant to the order dated 14.9.2010 in Cri. Application No.1252/2010 that the trial Court shall complete the trial within a period of six months, the trial has not even started; no charge has been framed by the learned trial Magistrate. The period of six months has already been elapsed since the order was passed by this Court on 14.9.2010 but even charge in the case has not yet been framed by the learned trial Magistrate. The co-accused and alleged kingpin 2 Pramod Mahajan who, in fact, is the main accused in the case has been released on bail. The applicant also claims parity for benefit of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is in custody since 14.9.2009 and a long time has elapsed. Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that the case is triable by Magistrate and more than half of the period of probable sentence is already undergone by the present applicant. The plea for bail is opposed at the instance of the Respondent-State by the reply dated 6.4.2011. The learned APP objected grant of bail tooth and nail on the ground that accusations are serious. However, the fact that trial did not commence since 14.9.2010 despite direction by this Court for early hearing of the case and furthermore the fact that co- accused- Pramod Agrawal is granted benefit of bail is not disputed. That being so I am inclined to grant conditional bail, considering the submissions on behalf of the applicant with reference to ruling in Ashok Dhingra vs. NCT of Delhi 2000 Cri.L.J. 4045 (SC). Considering the fact that accused was in custody for more six months it was held by the Apex Court that continuous detention of the accused during trial stage may not be in the interest of justice. Thus, the benefit of conditional bail was granted. The ruling is attracted in respect of the facts of the present case also. Therefore, the following order is passed : Order The applicant shall be released on bail in respect of Crime No. 214/2009 reported at Sitabuldi Police Station Nagpur, upon executing a PR bond in the sum of Rs. 3 1,00,000 /- with one or more surety in the equal amount; provided further that he shall attend the Investigating Officer as and when required. He shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall inform his permanent address with Telephone/Cell Number, if any, to the I.O. concerned as well as Presiding Officer of the Court below and shall not misuse the liberty in any manner. He shall surrender his passport, if any, to the I.O. Application is disposed of. JUDGE sahare