1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 132 OF 2008 Rameshchandra Durlabh Shah .. Applicant versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ... Ms.Kokila Kalra for the applicant. Mr.S.S. Pednakar APP for the State. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J DATED : 24th March 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard. 2. The applicant seeks bail in connection with C.R.No.101 of 2004 of Chhavani police station, Malegaon for the alleged offence punishable u/s.420, 465, 467, 474 r/w section 34 of the IPC. 3. The prosecution case in short is that the applicant along with accomplices enticed several persons with offer of employments and collected money from them. He prepared false documents for the 2 purpose of offering of the employment but actually employment was never offered. Large amount of money of more than Rs.18 lakhs was received from the various persons deceived. 4. The applicant was arrested on 26th May 2005. Charge-sheet has been filed on 13th July 2005 and the case has been transferred to the Sessions Court in September 2005. Though more than 2 1/2 years have passed, the trial has not yet commenced and the applicant is in custody for more than 2 1/2 years. Learned APP states that he cannot state when the trial is likely to commence as there are many cases pending and the case is being transferred from one Sessions Judge to another from time to time. In the circumstances, it appears that in the near future the trial is not reasonably possible. 5. All other co-accused who are alleged to have jointly committed offence have been granted bail. The present applicant was rejected bail by the Sessions Judge principally on the ground that he was absconding and was arrested from Bangalore. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was not absconding but he had gone to Bangalore to meet his daughter and had no knowledge of the offence being registered against him. In my view that fact 3 alone cannot be a ground for rejecting bail and keeping him in custody for 2 1/2 years. Stringent conditions can be imposed for ensuring his attendance and availability at the trial. Learned counsel for the applicant says that applicant’s family has secured a place in Navi Mumbai and undertakes to inform the local address to this court as well as to the police. Taking all these facts into consideration, I pass the following order:- O R D E R O R D E R O R D E R . The applicant be released on bail of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of like amount subject to the following conditions:- i) The applicant shall submit to this court on affidavit as well as to the concerned police station his local address at Vashi before he is actually released on bail. The applicant shall file an undertaking to this court that he will not change his place of residence except after obtaining prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned. ii) The applicant shall report to the concerned police station once a month between 1st and 5th day of British Calendar month. 4 (D.G. KARNIK, J)