Anil Nana Kale v. The State Of Maharashtra

28) BA1501-16 sas

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1501 OF 2016 Anil Nana Kale ..Applicant.

V/s.

State of Maharashtra ..Respondent.

Mr.Tushar Sonawane for the applicant.

Mrs.Veera Shinde, APP for respondent-State.

CORAM : A.M.BADAR, J.

DATED : 8TH AUGUST, 2016 P.C. :- 1.

The applicant / accused in Crime No.321/2016 for the offences punishable under section 394, 341, 342 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Pandharpur Taluka Police Station, District Solapur at the instance of informant Navnath Somnath by this application is praying for releasing him on bail.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant / accused. By pointing out the remand report, the learned counsel argued that more than the material which is alleged to be looted by the present applicant and the co-accused is 1/2

28) BA1501-16 recovered by the Investigating Officer. The learned counsel, therefore, argues that as the investigation is virtually over, his pre-trial detention of the applicant is not warranted. 3.

The learned APP opposed the application by arguing that the present applicant is the kingpin of the crime in question. It is at his instance, some of the looted material is recovered. However, 120 boxes of Indian Made Foreign Liquor robbed by the present applicant and co-accused is yet to be recovered.

4.

Perused the papers of investigation. The investigation of the crime in question is still in progress and some of the looted material is yet to be recovered. Hence at this stage, discretion to enlarge the applicant on bail cannot be exercised. The application is, therefore, rejected. 5.

Needless to state that these observations are prima facie observations and cannot be construed to mean that the application for bail after filing of the charge-sheet cannot be entertained by the Sessions Judge in view of the rejection of this application.

(A.M.BADAR, J.) 2/2