jpc appln4352-10.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4352 OF 2010 Sanjay Dnyaneshwar Kolekar ... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Rahul Arote, for the applicant Mrs. S. D. Shinde, APP for the State CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 5th July, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Arote, the learned advocate for the applicant and Mrs. Shinde, the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is in custody since last about six and half years. Trial has commenced in the year 2006. 3. The learned APP submits that total 122 witnesses have been examined during the trial and only 9 witnesses are remained to be examined. She, therefore, submits that at this stage, the applicant may not be released on bail and appropriate directions to expedite the trial be given. jpc appln4352-10.sxw 2 4. I am, however, informed by Mr. Arote that the learned Judge, who was previously trying the matter, has been transferred and a new Judge, who has not recorded the previous evidence, is incharge of the trial. If this is so, it would not be possible to expect the trial to be expeditiously completed, as the learned Judge, now seized of the matter, would be required to go through the evidence of 122 witnesses. 5. Mr. Arote submtis that many of the accused to whom serious role has been attributed in the alleged incident, have been released on bail. 6. In order to ascertain the precise role of the applicant, I have heard the Investigating Officer in that regard. According to him, the applicant is a person who transported the illicit liquor. According to him, it was the business of one Ramesh Pokharkar to procure illicit liquor from Thane District and sell the same to various small illicit liquor dealers in Mumbai. The allegation against the applicant is that he was assistant of the said Ramesh Pokharkar. The said Ramesh Pokharkar had already been released on bail. The reason given for his release appears to be that he was not identified by the witnesses in the Court. jpc appln4352-10.sxw 3 7. Mr. Arote states that the applicant has a fixed place of residence and it is not likely that he will abscond, if released on bail. 8. Considering the nature of the allegation and the role attributed to the applicant, as also the fact that he is in custody since January, 2005, I am inclined to release him on bail. 9. The application is allowed. 10. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with one surety in like amount, on the condition that he shall report to Vikhroli Office of D.C.B., C.I.D. Unit No.VII, between 10 a.m. to 12 noon, every day except Sundays and the dates on which he would remain present before the Court of Session for the trial, till the disposal of the case against him. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)