Takkusingh @ Naginsingh Ajitsingh Kalyani v. The State Of Maharashtra

2024:BHC-AUG:10586 25-BA-2017-23.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2017 OF 2023 TAKKUSINGH @ NAGINSINGH AJITSINGH KALYANI

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Abhaysinh K. Bhosle APP for Respondent : 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 respondent/State.

2.

The applicant has been arraigned as accused in the C.R.No.589 of 2022 registered with Vivekanand Chowk Police Station, Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no direct evidence against the applicant. The report was lodged against the unknown persons. The applicant is languishing in jail for a long period. The role attributed to the applicant is doubtful. The trial may take its time. Hence, he may be granted bail. He fairly conceded that the marriage of the daughter of the applicant has been over. Hence, application of the applicant send through jail become infructuous.

25-BA-2017-23.odt 4.

Learned A.P.P. submits that a huge amount of lakhs of rupees and the golden ornaments have been recovered from the accused which was the property of the crime. Serious offence has been committed. Best evidence in the case of recovery of stolen property is against the applicant. He has no satisfactory explanation that how huge amount of lakhs of rupees and golden ornaments are owned by him. Hence, he has no good ground for bail.

5.

Perused the chargesheet.

6.

The amount of more than Rs.14,00,000/- and golden ornaments have been recovered from the accused. The applicant has no explanation for its ownership or any source that he had to have such a huge amount. Prima facie, the evidence is against the applicant. It is serious offence of committing dacoity. Hence, the application deserves to be dismissed.

7.

The application stands dismissed.

( S. G. MEHARE ) JUDGE rrd