Uddhav S/O Subhash Nangare v. The State Of Maharashtra
1 Cri. Appln. 6722/2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6722 OF 2016 Uddhav S/o Subhash Nangare, Age : 31 years, Occu.: Education, R/o : At post Dedgaon, Tq. Newasa, Dist. Ahmednagar .. Applicant Vs.
The State of Maharashtra Topkhana Police Station, Ahmednagar .. Respondent ---- Mr. D.A. Naik, Advocate for the applicant Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, APP for the respondent/State ---- CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.
DATE : 22/12/2016 ORAL ORDER :
Heard.
2.
The applicant, who has been arrested on 24/9/2016 in connection with Crime no.I-285 of 2016 registered with Topkhana Police Station, District - Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Section 489(B)(C) of the Indian Penal Code, seeks his release on bail.
2 Cri. Appln. 6722/2016 3.
As per the first information report, on 16th September, 2016 Police authorities got secret information that some persons in possession of counterfeit currency notes of Rs.1000/- and Rs.500/- were likely to come in front of hotel Priyadarshini. On that basis, a trap was laid and in the presence of panch witnesses, three persons with various currency notes in the aforesaid denominations were trapped. During the further investigation, name of the applicant has surfaced. After the applicant was arrested, his house was inspected and panchanama was drawn on 30/9/2016 and nothing incriminating was seized. Thereafter chargesheet came to be filed on 14/12/2016. 4.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been implicated on the basis of statement of co-accused no.4. It is pointed out that accused nos.1 to 4 and 6 have been released on bail as per order dated 30/11/2016 in Criminal Application No.6270 of 2016 with connected matters. It is therefore submitted that as the entire investigation is complete, further detention of the applicant is not warranted.
3 Cri. Appln. 6722/2016 5.
The application is opposed by learned Additional Public Prosecutor by relying upon the statements recorded. It is submitted that involvement of the present applicant is evident from the aforesaid statements. Considering the gravity of the offence, the Application deserves to be rejected.
6.
Perused the chargesheet as well as the order dated 30/11/2016 referred to above. Considering the reasons mentioned in the said order coupled with the fact that name of the present applicant has been taken by another co-accused, I find that case of the applicant is similar to that of accused no.6. Moreover, after completion of investigation, the chargesheet has now been filed.
7.
In view of aforesaid, the following order :-
ORDER
I] The applicant, who has been arrested in Crime no.I-285 of 2016 registered with Topkhana Police Station, District - Ahmednagar for the offences
4 Cri. Appln. 6722/2016 punishable under Section 489(B)(C) of the Indian Penal Code, is directed to be released on bail, upon furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like amount.
II] Applicant shall not take any steps to influence the prosecution witnesses.
III] He shall co-operate in completion of the trial.
8.
By clarifying that the observations made in this order are only for deciding the bail Application, the same is accordingly allowed and disposed of. [A.S. CHANDURKAR] JUDGE arp/