Anil Rajendranath Pandey v. The State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.3121 OF 2022 Digitally signed by PRADNYA MAKARAND BHOGALE Date:
2023.01.12 19:14:26 +0530 Anil Rajendranath Pandey ..Applicant VS.
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ------------ Mr. Saumitra Salunke a/w Mr. P. R. Yadav, Ms. Swapnali Chavan for the applicant.
PRADNYA MAKARAND BHOGALE Mr. S. V. Gavand, APP for the State.
Mr. B. V. Gaonkar, PSI, Amboli Police Station is present. ------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATE : JANUARY 12, 2023 P.C. :
1.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
2.
This is an application for bail by the applicant-Anil Rajendranath Pandey in connection with C.R. No.390 of 2017 dated 01/11/2017 registered with Amboli Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 364-A, 307, 324, 341, 368, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3 and 25 of the Indian Arms Act and under Section 37(1) of the Maharashtra Police Act. 1/5
3.
My attention is invited to the order dated 09/11/2022 passed in Bail Application No.2797 of 2022. The applicantMohammed Shanu Mohammed Rafiq Shaikh in Bail Application No.2797 of 2022 is the main accused. The allegation against the present applicant is that he assisted the main accused. The order is reproduced, which will cover the facts of the present case as well. The order reads thus :- "1.
Heard learned counsel Mr. Nikam for the applicant and learned A.P.P. Ms. Shinde for the State. 2.
Mr. Nikam would press into service the ground of long incarceration by submitting that he came to be arrested in the subject C.R. registered with Amboli Police Station on 04/11/2017 and despite five years down the line, trial has not been completed.
The applicant faces charge under Sections 364(A), 307, 324, 341, 368, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 120(B) of IPC and under Sections 3, 25 of the Arms Act alongwith Section 37(1) of the Maharashtra Police Act.
3.
The case of the prosecution is to the effect that on 31/10/2017, some unknown persons kidnapped Bhavin Shah, the husband of the complainant and it is alleged that the complainant received a video clip on her Whatsapp Messanger, wherein her husband stated that some persons have kidnapped him and have confined him and they are demanding ransom of Rs.82,00,000/- for his release, else he would be killed. Admittedly, the entire amount of ransom was not paid and in fact the police agency rescued the victim.
2/5
As far as Section 307 of IPC is concerned, when the injury certificate is perused, barring one injury on the parietal region, no other injuries sustained by the victim, without any specification being highlighted in the certificate issued by the private Nursing Home, could have bee said to be responsible for causing his death.
4.
The applicant seeks his release on the ground of delay in trial and it can be seen that the prosecution has cited 36 witnesses, out of which third witness is under examination and it can be apparently inferred that trial is likely to consume some more time to be concluded.
The Hon'ble Apex Court has reiterated the need of speedy trial and in the case of Union of India Vs. K. A. Najeeb, it is specifically observed that the liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit, not only due procedure and fairness, but also access to justice and a speedy trial. While dealing with the case under UAPA Act, which is a special statute, the Hon'ble Apex Court has specifically held that there should not be hurdle in granting bail on the ground of infringement of Article 21 of Constitution of India. Right of speedy and fair trial has been thus recognized as a fundamental right and the long incarceration of the accused persons have entitled them for being released on bail, awaiting their trial.
I see no reason to take a different view. The applicant may take the consequences of the seriousness of the accusations levelled against him in the charge-sheet, but at present, since he is incarcerated for more than last five years and the trial is likely to consume considerable time in the light of the fact that the prosecution intends to examine as many as 36 witnesses, I refrain myself from commenting upon the merits of the case and deem it appropriate to secure his liberty only on the ground of long incarceration. This is, however, subject to the 3/5
stipulation that he shall attend the trial on regular basis and there shall be no fault on his part in attending the trial. In case, there is any attempt on his part to prolong the trial, the liberty conferred on him would be liable to be curtailed.
Hence, the following order.
:ORDER:
(a) Application is allowed.
(b) Applicant - Mohammed Shanu Mohammed Rafiq Shaikh shall be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.390 of 2017 registered with Amboli Police Station on furnishing P.R. Bond to the extent of Rs.50,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.
(c) The applicant shall attend the trial on regular basis and shall abide by the directions issued by the trial Court. Any attempt on his part in delaying the trial would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of his bail.
(d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer. The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(e) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change."
4.
For the same reasons, as the main accused has been released on bail, even the present applicant deserves to be released on bail. Hence, the following order. 4/5
ORDER
(a) Application is allowed.
(b) Applicant-Anil Rajendranath Pandey shall be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.390 of 2017 registered with Amboli Police Station on furnishing P.R. Bond to the extent of Rs.50,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.
(c) The applicant shall attend the trial on regular basis and shall abide by the directions issued by the trial Court. Any attempt on his part in delaying the trial would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of his bail.
(d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer. The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(e) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. 5.
The Bail Application is disposed of.
(M. S. KARNIK, J.) 5/5