Dattatraya Bhimrao Dhadam v. The State Of Maharashtra

Vishal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1200 OF 2015 Dattatraya Bhimrao Dhadam ... Applicant vs.

The State of Maharashtra and Others ... Respondents Mr. Lokesh Zade i/b. Khandeparkar and Associates, for the Applicant.

Mrs. R.V. Newton, APP for Respondent No. 1 - State. Ms. Rebeeca Gonsalvez, for Respondent No. 2.

CORAM:

MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

DATE:

JULY 22, 2015 P.C.:

.

The application is moved for bail as the applicant/accused is facing charge for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act in C.R. No. RCBA1/2015/A0018 registered with CBI ACB, Mumbai.

2.

It is the case of the prosecution that one Dwarkanand Dicholkar has given the first information report. He was running a 1 / 4

Lodging and Boarding house at Mumbai-Goa national highway No. 17, Sindhudurg Nagri, Oras. It is his case that, the people from PWD Department were taking measurement of the land in front of his Lodge as the expansion of highway is going to commence. The complainant was informed that the access to his Lodging and Boarding from highway will be closed after width expansion work of the highway. Therefore, the complainant was asked to contact the applicant. He contacted him. At that time, the applicant/accused demanded bribe of Rs. 5,50,000/- for getting access road from his lodge to the highway. It was agreed that the advance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- would be handed over to the applicant on 17th June, 2015. Thereafter, the complainant informed about this demand of bribe to C.B.I. Accordingly, a trap was arranged on 18th June, 2015. The applicant/accused thereafter caught red-handed when he accepted amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as a first installment of demand of bribe. He was taken in the custody. The applicant/accused is in the custody since then. Hence, this bail application.

3.

The learned counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that this is the offence under the Prevention of Corruption 2 / 4

Act. The applicant/accused was in police custody since 18th June, 2015 and now he was transferred to judicial custody. Therefore, his custody is not required. The learned counsel for the applicant/ accused has submitted that the applicant/accused is ready to cooperate with the police in the investigation. He is ready to give his voice sample after he is bailed out and he will abide all the conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for bail 4.

The learned prosecutor opposed the bail application. She submitted that, the applicant/accused is in police custody only for four days. Thereafter his custody was transferred to Magistrate custody. She submitted that the applicant/accused was transferred from Sindhudurg to Mumbai prison. His voice samples are yet to be taken. She submits that for taking voice samples of the applicant/ accused, his custody is required. Hence, bail application be rejected. 5.

Perused the first information report. It is a trap case. The police have collected evidence in respect of the trap. The police have also recovered the trap money. So also the statement made at bar that the applicant/accused is ready to cooperate with the police and he 3 / 4

will give his voice sample. In view of this, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

6.

Hence, I grant bail as under:

a) The applicant/accused be enlarged on bail upon furnishing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- (Forty Thousand) with one or two solvent surety/s in the like amount;

b) He shall cooperate with the investigating officer and shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the investigating officer.

c) In case of any change of the residence of the applicant/accused, he shall furnish his residential address to C.B.I.

d) He shall not indulge in any criminal activity or pressuring the complainant.

7.

The bail application stands disposed of on the above terms.

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) 4 / 4