Anilkumar Chhotelal Yadav v. The State Of Maharashtra

17 APPA 112 OF 2016.doc vks

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.112 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.588 OF 2015 Anil Kumar Chhotelal Yadav ....

Applicant V/s.

State of Maharashtra ....

Respondent Mr. Sachin Chandan, appointed advocate for the Applicant. Mr. H. J. Dedia, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, ACTING C.J. & DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.

DATE :11 TH FEBRUARY 2016.

P.C:

1.

This application is for bail, preferred by original accused No.1, who is convicted alongwith co-accused, for the offence punishable under Sections 392 and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

As per learned counsel for applicant, the case is based on circumstantial evidence and there is no recovery of stolen articles at the instance of applicant. Therefore, applicant deserve to be released on bail.

3.

However, the evidence on record shows that the

17 APPA 112 OF 2016.doc dead body of deceased Shankar was found in the workshop and since then his two workers namely applicant and co-accused were found missing. The Call Detail Record is also produced on record. Prosecution has also relied upon the evidence relating to recovery of the key of the workshop at the instance of applicant and recovery of stolen articles at the instance of coaccused. In view of this prima facie evidence on record coupled with the fact that during pendency of the appeal also, applicant was not released on bail, in our view, his substantive sentence cannot be suspended during pendency of the appeal. The application therefore stands dismissed.

Fees be paid to the the appointed advocate as per rules.

[ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE.] [DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.]