1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2704 OF 2009 Shiv Kumar s/o Arun Kumar .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr.A.M.Saraogi for the applicant. Mrs.S.D.Shinde A.P.P. for the State. Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 9TH JULY, 2009 P.C. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in Sessions Case No.743 of 2008 arising from C.R.No.81 of 2004 of G.B.C.B C.I.D. The crime has been registered against the applicant and others for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 255, 256, 257, 259, 260, 465, 467, 468, 471, 201, 120B of IPC. 3. In the aforementioned crime the applicant was enlarge on bail vide order dated 21.9.2005 by the Sessions Court. The operative portion of the order dated 21.9.2005 enlarging the 2 applicant on bail read thus: “1. Applicant Arun Kumar be released on bail on executing PR bond of Rs.20,000/- and one or two sureties of like amount. 2. Applicant shall deposit the amount of Rs.1 Lakh in the Bank from which money is borrowed, within four weeks. 3. Applicant shall attend the Pl.Stn. As and when called by IO for the purpose of investigation. “ 4. It appears that the applicant remained absent for eight consecutive dates before the Sessions Court which forced the learned Judge to issue non bailable warrant (for short “NBW”) against him. In execution of the NBW the applicant came to be arrested and was produced before the learned Judge, who remanded him to judicial custody. It is against this backdrop the application at Exhibit-63 was filed before the Sessions Court for bail which came to be rejected by the Sessions Court vide order dated 17.6.2009 and hence the applicant is before this court. On last occasion Ms.Shinde, learned A.P.P. had pointed out that the applicant did not deposit Rs.1 lakh in the bank from which the money was borrowed within the time stipulated by the order dated 21.9.2005. Today, Mr.Saraogi, learned counsel for the applicant makes a statement that the said amount has been deposited by the applicant. This statement has not been 3 disputed by the learned A.P.P. Having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case so also the submission of Mr.Saraogi that due to some communication gap the applicant did not remain present before the court on eight consecutive dates, I am inclined to enlarge him on bail. Hence the following order: Applicant be released on bail in the sum of Rs.35,000/- with two local sureties to make up the said amount, subject to the condition that the applicant shall report to the concerned police station on every Saturday between 6 pm and 7 pm till conclusion of the trial. The applicant shall also attend every date of hearing before the Sessions Court, failing which, it is open for the police to take him in custody without further directions from the court. It is open for the applicant to seek exemption well in advance, in the event he is unable to attend the court on any particular date, from the concerned court. The concerned court shall consider such application on merits in accordance with law. Application is disposed of. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)