1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1398 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Coram: Shrihari P. Davare, J. Date : 07.04.2011. 1. Heard Shri V.I. Thole, learned Advocate for the applicant-original accused. 2. Issue notice to Respondent. Smt. Y.M.Kshirsagar, learned A.P.P. waives notice for the Respondent. 3. This is an application preferred by the applicant-original accused for bail, in connection with C.R. No. 56 of 1995 registered with Gondi Police Station, for offences punishable under Sections 409, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered on the complaint filed 2 by complainant, namely, Keshavrao Baburao Warkhade. 4. It is the contention of the applicant-accused that he was arrested under aforesaid CR No. 56/1995 and was released on bail in the sum of Rs. 25,000/=. Thereafter, investigation was completed and charge-sheet was filed before the Court of Learned J.M.F.C., Ambad, under R.C.C. No. 5 of 1997. 5. However, it is alleged that the applicant remained absent despite proper service of summons and hence, learned Magistrate issued Non Bailable Warrant against the applicant-accused, as well as notice to the surety. At last, presence of the accused was secured through coercive measures and thereafter he applied for bail, but his application was rejected by the learned Magistrate, on 21.12.2010. 3 6. Thereafter, present applicant-accused preferred an application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Jalna, but since the hearing of the case, which is quite old, was held-up from 1997, and also considering the reasons recorded by the learned Magistrate in his order dated 21.12.2010 for rejecting the bail, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge also rejected the application preferred by the applicant, vide order dated 23.3.2011, and hence, the applicant has preferred present application for the prayer stated therein. 7. Learned Counsel for the applicant, Shri V.I. Thole, submitted that the applicant did not receive notice after filing of charge sheet and, therefore, he could not attend the court of learned J.M.F.C. in R.C.C. No. 5 of 1997, as he was not aware thereof. 8. Learned APP Smt. Y.M.Kshirsagar opposed the applicant vehemently, and submitted that the 4 applicant-accused jumped the bail, and hearing of case, which is of 1997 and thus quite old, has come to grinding halt, and hence, prayed for rejection of the application. 9. After considering the contents of the application and also submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that once the applicant was released on bail in the sum of Rs. 25,000/= by the learned Magistrate, and therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on fresh bail, but on imposition of stringent conditions, to ensure his presence for the trial. 10. In the result, the present application is allowed and the applicant Mohan Shankarrao Pradhan is directed to be be released on fresh bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/=, with one surety in the like amount, on the following conditions; 5 (i) The applicant shall report to the Court of J.M.F.C. Ambad, in connection with R.C.C. No. 5 of 1997 on the ensuing date and shall continue to attend each and every date of the said proceedings, without fail. (ii) The applicant shall give his attendance before the concerned police station in the first week of each month, till the disposal of R.C.C. No.5/1997. Application stands disposed of, accordingly. pnd/criap-1398.11 (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.)