Pappu @ Suhas Kisan Sonwalkar v. The State Of Maharashtra

32- BA-2571-24 -SPM.DOC Sayali Upasani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2571 OF 2024 Pappu @ Suhas Kisan Sonwalkar ...Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Nagesh Khedkar, Advocate for Applicant. Mrs. Veera Shinde, APP for State-Respondent.

CORAM:- ANIL S. KILOR, J.

DATED:- 12th DECEMBER, 2024 PC :- 1) Not on Board. Upon mentioning taken on Board. 2) Office has placed this matter for Speaking to the Minutes of the Order dated 18th November,2024.

3) Paragraph Nos. 3 to 9 be corrected and read as under:- "3. It is argued that the applicant was driving the motorcycle and the co-accused was the pillion rider who fired a round from a pistol on the police staff. It is argued that the applicant is not the one who fired. It is submitted that nothing has been recovered from him. He therefore prays for grant bail.

4. On the other hand, the learned APP pointed out that in this case, the provisions of MCOC have been invoked against the applicant and there are five offences against the 1/2

32- BA-2571-24 -SPM.DOC applicant, which are common with the gang, including the present offence.

5. In the above-referred backdrop, having gone through the charge-sheet and relevant material collected by the Investigating Officer during the investigation, it is evident that there is sufficient evidence to show that the applicant is a member of the syndicate. There are offences including the present one against the applicant, which are common with the gang. Furthermore, there are statements of the members of police staff, who were present when a round was fired on them from a pistol by the co-accused i.e. accused No. 1.

6. In the circumstances, since there is sufficient incriminating material against the applicant, it cannot be said that there is a reasonable ground to believe that the applicant is not guilty of the present offence and further considering the fact that there are antecedents against the applicant, it cannot be said that if the applicant is released on bail, he will be available for trial.

7. In the circumstances, the application is rejected and disposed of.

8. At this stage, the learned Counsel for the applicant seeks liberty to move afresh.

9. Liberty is granted to move afresh in case of a change in circumstances."

4) The said corrections be carried out and the corrected order be uploaded accordingly.

[ANIL S. KILOR, J.] 2/2