Rahul Damu Bhosle v. The State Of Maharashtra

(1) ba-132-2024.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO.132 OF 2024 RAHUL S/O DAMU BHOSLE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Mr. S. P. Bhadge, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. N. S. Tekale, APP for Respondent-State.

...

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

RESERVED ON :- 12th FEBRUARY 2024.

PRONOUNCED ON :- 16th FEBRUARY 2024.

ORDER:- 1.

The applicant seeks regular bail in connection with Crime No.287 of 2022 registered with Kopargaon Police Station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

The applicant came to be arrested in pursuance of the aforesaid crime. He was subjected to identification parade. The witness namely Kavita Anil Sonawane identified him to be culprit. The applicant is behind the bar from 17.09.2022.

3.

This is successive bail application of the applicant. Previously he had filed bail application post filing of the charge-sheet before the Sessions Court. His application was rejected vide order dated 11.04.2023. The applicant had approached this Court vide Bail Application No.1244/2023. After hearing, when this Court shown disinclination, the applicant withdrew the said application. Accordingly, it was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21.08.2023. 4.

Mr. Bhadge, learned Advocate appearing for the applicant submits that the trial is at nascent stage. Even, charge could not be

(2) ba-132-2024.odt framed till this date. The period of more than 17 months have been lapsed since the date of arrest of the applicant and trial is likely to take its own course. In that view of the matter, the applicant be released on bail.

5.

Pertinently, all these aspects were argued before this Court in Bail application No.1244/2023. There are no change in circumstance that warrants re-consideration of successive bail application. Pertinently, offence is serious. There are criminal antecedents to discredit the applicant. His release at this stage may cause serious prejudice to the prosecution.

6.

Resultantly, there is no merit in the application. Hence, application stands rejected.

(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE Devendra/February-2024