Kinjal Suniil Bhandari v. U T Of Dadra And Nagar Haveli And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4257 OF 2024 Kinjal Suniil Bhandari ... Applicant.
Vs.
U. T. of Dadra & Nagar Haveli & Anr.
... Respondents.
**** Mr. Randhir Singh a/w Mr. Sameer Modasia & Mr. Rahul Sagar, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. Hiten Venegavkar Special P. P. for Respondent No.1. Dr. A. A. Takalkar, APP for Respondent/State. **** CORAM :
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE :
24th JULY, 2025.
P.C. :
1.
Heard Mr. Randhir Singh, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mr. Hiten Venegavkar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.1 and Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the Respondent.
2.
By the present Application, the Applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 337 of 2023 registered with Silvassa Police Station Daman. Said crime is registered as Sessions Case No.1 of 2024 and is pending before the Court of Sessions Judge Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Silvassa. 3.
This Court had made the following order on 10th February, 2025 in Bail Application No. 4257 of 2025 :- Mr. Kumar Ali Shaikh holding for Mr. Venegavkar, Special P.P., on instructions, submits that the charge is already framed and the prosecution would endeavour to conclude it's evidence within a period of three months. In that view of the matter, list the application on 05.05.2025.
4.
Mr. Randhir Singh placing reliance on the order dated 10th February, 2025 submits that though the period of 3 months time has expired, prosecution has failed to complete/ conclude their evidence. 5.
Mr. Hiten Venegavkar, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.1, submits that there was delay in examination of the prosecution witnesses, in view of certain circumstances which include the transfer of the Judge. He submits that presently 3 prosecution witnesses have been examined. He on instructions from the Investigation Officer submits that out of the 22 prosecution witnesses listed, prosecution will examine a total of 11 witnesses in the Sessions Case No.1 of 2024. He again on instructions submits that the prosecution would positively conclude its evidence within 45 days from 1st August,2025.
6.
On the basis of the statement made by Mr. Hiten Venegavkar, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.1, Mr. Randhir Singh submits that the present Application can be disposed of, by accepting the statements made by Mr. Hiten Venegavkar, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.1.
7.
Considering the order dated 10th February, 2025 and by accepting the statements made by Mr. Hiten Venegavkar, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.1, as recorded in paragraph No. 5 herein above, this present Bail Application is disposed of. 8.
Learned Advocates for the Applicant and the learned Special Standing Counsel, assures this Court to co-operate with the Trial Court in early disposal of Sessions Case No. 1 of 2024.
9.
Mr. Randhir Singh without doubting the statement made on behalf of the prosecution submits that in the event the prosecution do not conclude their evidence witness within 45 days from 1st August, 2025, then the Applicant be granted liberty to file a fresh Bail Application before the Trial Court, by raising all the grounds as available to the Applicant. Mr. Hiten Venegavkar by reiterating his statements made in paragraph 5 hereinabove, does not object to the requests made by Mr. Randhir Singh. In the event prosecution fails to conclude their evidence within 45 days, Applicant is at liberty to file a fresh Application before the learned Trial court, which shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law. 10.
Criminal Bail Application No. 4257 of 2024 is disposed of in view of the above said terms.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) by GAYATRI RAJENDRA SHIMPI Date:
2025.07.25 09:50:01 +0530 GAYATRI RAJENDRA SHIMPI