Anil Shankar Vetal v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2024:BHC-AUG:10587 33-BA-722-24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 722 OF 2024 ANIL SHANKAR VETAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Chetan B. Chaudhari APP for Respondents : Mr. S. B. Narwade ...
CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.
DATE : 10-06-2024 PER COURT :- 1.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the respondents.
2.
The applicant seeks bail in C.R.139 of 2018 registered with Songir Police Station, Taluka and District Dhule, for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 342, 412 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, on the ground of parity.
3.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is languishing in jail since 5 years and 10 months. The trial has been progressed. The recording of the defence evidence is going on. He submits that the similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail and nothing is to be investigated in the crime.
33-BA-722-24.odt 4.
Learned A.P.P. submits that the role attributed to the applicant is specific that the offence has been committed at the gun point. The country made pistol with live cartridges and cash of Rs.2,00,000/- have been recovered from the applicant. He submits that the prosecution evidence has been closed. The trial is likely to be concluded. Considering the material against the applicant and the nature of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to bail.
5.
Perused the papers.
6.
Though, the accused has been languishing in jail for 5 years and 10 months, the prosecution has concluded its side. Now, the defence has to examine the witnesses. If the defence evidence would be closed, the matter would be concluded by the trial Court. That apart, the role attributed to the applicant is serious. He was possessing a country made pistol with live cartridges and on gun point he committed serious offence of dacoity. He has played an active role in committing the crime.
7.
Considering the facts in-toto and the progress in the trial, the applicant does not deserve bail.
8.
Hence, the application stands dismissed.
( S. G. MEHARE ) JUDGE rrd