Sanjay Lilaram Rohira v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Prasad R. Rajput IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.

OF 2024 Parameeta Chakravarty .. Applicant

Versus

State Of Maharashtra .. Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.

OF 2024 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.

OF 2024 Sanjay Lilaram Rohira .. Applicant

Versus

State Of Maharashtra and Anr.

.. Respondents ....................

 Mr. Mubin Solkar, Advocate for Applicant.

 Mr. Hasan Sayed i/b Mariyam Khatkhatay, Advocate for Intervenor/Applicant.

 Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for State.

 Mr. Ganesh Patil, PI, Powai Police Station.

...................

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : JANUARY 23, 2025 P. C.

:

1.

Heard Mr.

Sayed, learned Advocate for Intervenor/Applicant and Ms. Bajoria, learned APP for State. 2.

In pursuance to the order dated 3rd January, 2024, Ms. Bajoria, learned APP would place on record the report of Department of Traumatology and Orthopedic Surgery of Sir J.J. Group of Hospitals Mumbai dated 13.01.2025. Reading of the report shows that Applicant

has been critically examined by the Ophthalmology Department and Orthopedics and Neurosurgery Department and Obstetrics and Gynecology Department and her reports are absolutely normal and she is being taken care of and also given appropriate and regular treatment. It is directed that Applicant shall be given appropriate and regular treatment and if required shall be referred to Sir J.J. Group of Hospitals Mumbai.

3.

Mr. Solkar, learned Advocate for Applicant has attempted to persuade me to hear the application on merits for grant of bail to the Applicant. The Applicant is in incarceration since 2 years 9 months. Prima facie after perusing the record I am not inclined to consider the said Application. The only reason which compels me not to consider this Application on merits at this stage is because Applicant is not showing her bonafides. Mr. Solkar would submit that since she is in incarceration it would be difficult for her to raise funds. List of the FIRs and orders granting Bail as well as Anticipatory Bail are also placed before this Court by Mr. Solkar. In his usual fairness Mr. Solkar has taken me through these orders and would submit that considering that Applicant is a lady who has already been incarcerated since long, in view of her long incarceration her Application be considered by Court. From the reading of the FIRs and complaints, the modus operandi

of Applicant is clearly evident from her 11 antecedents which are also considered by this court while passing various orders. 4.

Section 467 has also been applied insofar as the Applicant before me is concerned wherein the punishment/imprisonment may extend upto life. The economic offence of stature which is before me and with respect to multiple persons is something which persuades me not to consider the Application. It shall be open for the Applicant to make appropriate Application before the Court along with a concrete road-map to show her bonafides and only on that ground case of Applicant will be considered by the Court.

5.

Mr. Solkar seeks time to take appropriate instructions. Time is granted. At his request stand over to 13th February, 2025. P. R. Rajput [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]