Chandan Suraj Jaiswar v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IRESH SIDDHARAM MASHAL Date: 2021.12.04 19:07:44 +0530 IRESH SIDDHARAM MASHAL ISM

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3541 OF 2021 CHANDAN SURAJ JAISWAR ....APPLICANT V/s.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA .....RESPONDENTS AND ANR Mr. Mahesh Vaswani a/w Dharini Nagda, Priyanka Pal i/b Shreya Tiwari for the applicant Ms. A. A. Takalkar APP for the State CORAM :

NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE:

DECEMBER 3, 2021.

P.C.:

1] Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R. No. 64/2014 registered with MIDC Police Station for Offences punishable under Sections 376D, 377, 307, 392, 452, 342 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2] The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are, applicant has suffered incarceration for more than 7 years. The trial, 1/3

even though is at an advance stage, is not likely to be concluded in recent future as there are certain interesting developments. It is claimed that demand of amount by the complainant and her husband is permitted to be produced before the Trial Court pursuant to order of the Court. By inviting my attention to the aforesaid development, it is claimed that trial is likely to take about another 8-10 months. Hence, it is claimed that applicant be directed to be released on bail.

3] Learned APP opposed the prayer and submits that applicant's involvement in a serious offence can be inferred. 4] Considered submissions.

5] I have perused evidence of the victim who has stood by what has been stated by her in the complaint resulting into registration of F.I.R.

6] In that view of the matter, it can be inferred that there is 2/3

sufficient strong evidence available on record against the applicant in the offence in question depending his prima-facie involvement. 7] Apart from above, the contention that there was demand of money for supporting the case of the defence by the victim and her husband, will appropriately dealt with by the Trial Court. 8] Prosecution has already closed its side of evidence and I am informed that defence witnesses are in witness box. 9] In the aforesaid background, no case for bail, in my opinion is made out.

10] Application stands rejected.

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.] 3/3