Anup Harishchandra Gondhali v. The State Of Maharashtra

BDP-SPS-TAC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BHARAT DASHARATH PANDIT CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2250 OF 2021 BHARAT DASHARATH PANDIT Date: 2021.11.27 16:06:27 +0530 Anup Harishchandra Gondhali .... Applicant.

V/s The State of Maharashtra ..... Respondent.

Mr. Mohammed Umar Kazi a/w Ammar Nizami for the Applicant. Mrs. J.S. Lohokare, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE: NOVEMBER 16, 2021 P.C.:- 1] Applicant is seeking regular bail in M.C.O.C. Special Case No.4 of 2015 arising out of C.R. No.123 of 2015 registered with Kalyan Taluka Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 147, 148, 149, 120B, 504, 507, 427 of the Indian Penal Code and read with Sections 3(1), 25, 27 of Indian Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of M.C.O.C. Act, 1999.

2] Prosecution case against the Applicant is, Poddar Builders hired services of Applicant in the matter of supply of construction material. However, similar work was allocated by the said builder to complainant Sunil. It is claimed that on May 21, 2015, Sunil lodged a 1/4

complaint against the Applicant, alleging that Applicant alongwith other six co-accused has tried to murder him on the ground of business rivalry. Having regard to the antecedents and the Applicant being member of a gang headed by Santosh Balu Gondhale/Accused No.1, provisions of M.C.O.C Act were invoked.

3] Applicant came to be chargesheeted in the offence in question after having noticed that in the past 10 years, not only there are 10 offences against the Applicant but also there is more than one chargesheet against the gang leader i.e. Accused No.1. 4] Counsel for the Applicant while trying to make out a case for grant of bail would invite attention of this Court to the orders passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 748 of 2017 on 29th September, 2017 releasing the Accused Santosh Balu Gondhale. Similarly, Accused Mahesh Munna Pal was released vide order dated 3rd March, 2020 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.922 of 2018 and Accused Jaykumar @ Akash Jitendra Bhoir was released vide order dated 20th January, 2021 passed in Criminal Bail Application (St) No. 1615 of 2020. It is claimed that Applicant has not actively participated in the 2/4

crime which is lodged at the behest of the complainant Sunil as the Applicant ran away from the spot as is claimed by the prosecution in its case. As such, according him, there are no criminal intentions on the part of the Applicant to commit the offence. 5] My attention is also invited to the common order dated 18th June, 2021 passed by the High Court in the matter of Pandurang Janardan Sante vs. The State of Maharashtra in Bail Application No.410 of 2020, Ganesh Shripat Mhaskar Vs. The State of Maharashtra in Bail Application No.211 of 2020 and in the matter of Rushabh Jayram Dhumal vs. The State of Maharashtra in Bail Application No.1002 of 2020.

6] Learned APP would submit that criminal history against the Applicant and the statement of eye witnesses sufficiently implicate the Applicant in the offence in question and as such rejection is sought. 7] Fact remains that other co-accused are admittedly granted bail by this Court on 29th September, 2017, 3rd March, 2020, 20th January, 2021 and 18th June, 2021. The order of court below rejecting prayer 3/4

of the Applicant is shown to be of 12th June, 2019 and as such there was no occasion for the court below to consider prayer of the Applicant based on parity.

8] In the aforesaid backdrop, present Application stands disposed of as rejected.

9] Applicant shall be at liberty to approach the Court below seeking his release on bail in view of aforesaid orders of this court. 10] Court below shall decide the said Application without being influenced by rejection of the present Application. ( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. ) 4/4