:1: :1: :1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 178 OF 2008 (FOR BAIL) Rahul Dnyaneshwar Kandhare ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ....Respondent ====== Mr.Vikas Shivarkar, Adv. for the petitioners. K.V.Saste, APP for the respondents. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED: 13TH MARCH, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. The matter was placed before me pursuant to an order passed by the Regular Court on 11.2.2008. 2. The Bail Application preferred by the Applicant being Cri.Application No.3889 of 2006 was disposed off as withdrawn on 29.11.2006 with liberty to the Applicant to move the Trial Court for bail. 3. The Applicant in pursuance of the said order, moved :2: :2: :2: for bail and the said Application was rejected by the order dated 11.10.2007. 4. The Trial Court after observing that co-accused Jaya Mankar is directed to be released on bail proceeded to reject the Application of the present Applicant for Bail on the ground that there are about 10 cases which are registered against the present Applicant, he was externed for 2 years and there are two eye-witnesses to the incident. The Applicant was absconding for a long period. In such circumstances, the fourth Application for bail was rejected. 5. Mr.Shivarkar, appearing for the Applicant submits that it was specifically urged before the trial Court that the role of the present Applicant and that of co-accused Jaya Mankar is identical. He invites my attention to the statement of the witnesses. He submits that identical weapons were recovered from Jaya Mankar. He was attributed the same role. 6. A perusal of the statement of Ganesh Mankar, copy of which is annexed at pages 8 to 11 of this :3: :3: :3: Application, reveals that the role of the present Applicant and that of Jaya Mankar is identical. Therefore, on ground of parity, the Applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. However, my attention is invited by Shri. Saste appearing for the State to the fact that there are several cases against the present Applicant which are pending. While not disputing that the role of the co-accused Jaya, and that of the present Applicant is identical, it is submitted that there are 20 cases which have been registered against the present Applicant and if enlarged on bail, he is likely to be unavailable at the trial. 7. Mr.Shivarkar has pointed out that all cases are registered at one Police Station namely, Kothrud and he has been enlarged on bail in all cases. In a case under Section 307 of IPC being C.R.No.8774 of 2007, the Applicant has been acquitted. 8. It is not disputed before me that the cases which are registered, are under Section 323 and 324 of IPC, so also, Section 504 and 506 of thereof. The other cases are under the Bombay Police Act. In one case, :4: :4: :4: C.R.No.1375 of 2005, the Applicant has been enlarged on bail. 9. In my view, with appropriate conditions being imposed, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail. When the ground of parity has not been denied, so also, considering that in all cases which are registered against him, the Applicant has been enlarged on bail, interest of justice would be subserved, if the following order is passed, more so, when the Applicant has been in custody from 3.06.2006. Hence the following order :- O R D E R R D E R R D E R (i) The Applicant who has been arrayed as Accused no.8 in offence punishable under Section 302 and 120(B) of I.P.C. vide C.R.no.275 of 2006 of Swargate Police Station, Pune is enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. :5: :5: :5: (ii) The Applicant shall reside outside the limits of the City of Pune, till the Trial is concluded. (iii) The Applicant shall not enter Pune City limits, save and accept, for the hearing of the Sessions and Criminal cases. (iv) The Applicant before release on bail, shall furnish his residential address to the Swargate Police Station and shall not change the same without prior intimation to the Swargate Police Station. (v) The Applicant shall report to the nearest Police Station of his residence once in a fortnight between 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. until the Trial is concluded. (vi) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the Applicant, shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement or threat to any prosecution witness and shall :6: :6: :6: not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence. (vii) The Applicant shall co-operate with the Learned Trial Judge for expeditious disposal of the trial. Any attempt by the Applicant to delay the trial may be a ground for cancellation of bail. (viii) 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. . Application disposed off. The parties to act on authenticated copy of this order. *******