Tag: Criminal Bail/Interim Bail

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.966 OF 2013 MR.SHABBU RAUF KHAN )...APPLICANT V/s. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. )...RESPONDENTS Mr.Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Mr.Subhash Hulyalkar Advocate for Applicant. Mrs.S.V.Sonawane APP for the State. CORAM: ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATE : rd JULY, 2013. 3 P.C. : 1 Heard. 2 Since the period of three moths stipulated by the order dated 12.4.2013 is not over, the application is premature, so to say. 3 However, in the circumstances explained by the learned counsel for the applicant, instead of rejecting the application on that ground, it would be proper to consider it after 12.7.2013. 4 Stand over to 16.7.2013. (ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.) avk 1/1

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.966 OF 2013 SHABBU RAUF KHAN )...APPLICANT V/s. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. )...RESPONDENTS Mr.Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Mr.Subhash Hulyalkar Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.G.P.Mulekar APP for the State. CORAM: ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATE : 16th JULY, 2013. P.C. : 1 Heard Mr.Satyavrat Joshi, the learned counsel for the applicant, and Mrs.G.P.Mulekar, the learned APP for the State. 2 The previous application filed by the applicant was withdrawn by him, after submitting that the applicant be granted liberty to apply afresh for bail, should the trial not commence within a reasonable time. Liberty was granted by the court to the applicant to apply afresh for bail, in the event of the trial not commencing within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the said order by the court. The order was passed on 12.4.2013. 3 I am informed that, though the said period is over, the trial has not yet commenced. The learned counsel for the applicant has produced a copy of the roznama of the trial court, which indicates that the trial has not yet commenced, and that, even a Charge has not yet been framed. 4 I have, therefore, considered the facts of the case, afresh. It is clear that though the participation of the applicant in the alleged incident, is indicated by the material in the chargesheet, the role attributed to the applicant is not as grave, as has been attributed to, two other accused. The applicant is alleged to have given a blow to the deceased by a pana on the wrist of the deceased. 5 The applicant is of 19 years. There are no antecedents. The applicant is in custody for a period of more than nine months. 6 Under these circumstances, I am inclined to grant one opportunity to the applicant of availing of liberty, subject to certain conditions. 7 The application is allowed. 8 The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/, with one surety in the like amount, or two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/ each, on the following conditions : i) The applicant shall not contact, meet or approach any of the prosecution witnesses, in any manner, whatsoever. ii) The applicant shall report to the Pimpri Police Station every Sunday, between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m., till the disposal of the case against him. (ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1003 OF 2015 Harish Kondu Kokare ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.for the Applicant APP, for Respondent – State CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: JUNE 16, 2015 P.C.: The applicant/accused is facing charges u/s 307, 341,34...... in C.R. No.65 of 2015 registered at Lonavla police station (Rural). A complaint was given by one A.S. Ghole on 21.4.2015. The incident of assault has taken place on 21.4.2015 at around 8.15 pm, when the complainant and one Bhau Gaikwad, who was the Sarpanch of the Panchayat Samiti, were going in a car and at that time, the applicant/accused and the co-accused came in a Zen car and the car of the complainant was stopped. They attacked the Sarpanch Bhau Gaikwad and also the complainant Ananta Gule. Bhau Gaikwad was injured as he was stabbed 5 to 6 times on chest and throat by the assailants. He was sent to hospital and the applicant/accused was arrested and taken into custody on the same day i.e., 21.4.2015 and since then, he is in prison. Hence, this bail application. The learned Counsel for the applicant/accused relied on the contents in the FIR, wherein it is stated that the applicant/accused assaulted the complainant with fist blows and there is no act of assaulting Bhau Gaikwad is mentioned. He submitted that he was not holding any weapon. It is further submitted that the applicant/accused is one of the members of the Panchayat Samiti and he did not attend two meetings of the Panchayat Samiti. Now the third meeting is scheduled on 18th June, 2015 and, therefore, if he fails to attend the said meeting, as per law, he will be debarred and his appointment will be canceled. The learned Prosecutor has opposed the application. The Investigating Officer is not present. She relied on the description of the injuries on Bhau Gaikwad. Perused the FIR. The act attributed to the applicant/accused is of giving a fist blow to the complainant. No specific act is attributed to him of assaulting Bhau Gaikwad. In view of the submission that the applicant/accused will be out of Panchayat Samiti if he does not attend the third meeting, I am inclined to grant bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed on the following terms and conditions: i) The applicant/accused shall be released on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/-, with one or two sureties in the like amount; 2 / 3 ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence; iii) The applicant shall not indulge into any kind of offence including offence on human body and especially on the Panchayat Samiti members, while on bail; iv) The applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer and attend the concerned police station on every Friday, between 6pm to 7pm, for a period of one month. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 3rd June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. stand over to 26/06/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ….... Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for Applicant. Ms.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 14th JUNE, 2019 P.C. : Learned APP seeks time to take instructions regarding health condition of the Applicant. Time as prayed for is granted. Stand over to 28/06/2019. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Anand S Patil For Applicant A.A.Takalkar APP for State/Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 28th June, 2019 P.C. : Mentioned. At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 03/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 3rd July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 26/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Anand S Patil For Applicant S.H.Yadav APP for State/Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 11th July, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 25/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 25th July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 21/08/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 21st August, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned.Stand over to 11/09/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 11th September, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 07/10/2019 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 7th October, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 14/11/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 14th November, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 03/12/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Shekhar Ingawle i/b. Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. …... …... Mrs.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : DECEMBER 17, 2019. P.C. : Learned Counsel for the Applicant tendered medical certificate dated 10th December, 2019. Same is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. Learned APP seeks time to take instructions. Stand over to 6th January, 2020. To be listed High on Board. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Shekhar Ingawale i/b.Anand S Patil For Applicant A.A.Takalkar APP for State/respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 6th January, 2020 P.C. : Learned APP seeks time to take instructions. S.O. to 08/01/2020 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 30: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Shekhar Ingawle i/b. Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. …... …... Mrs.Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : JANUARY 08, 2020. P.C. : The applicant is seeking bail on medical ground for temporary period. The applicant is in custody from 10th March, 2016 in connection with C.R.No.31 of 2016, registered with Ajara Police Station, District–Kolhapur for the ofences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B and 201 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code ("IPC", for short). 2 The applicant had earlier preferred an application for bail viz. Criminal Bail Application No.1466 of 2018. By order dated 28th August, 2018, it was directed that the jail Authorities shall ensure that the applicant is taken to Chougule Neurology Centre and Nursing Home, Kolhapur, on the date and time given for the applicant's check up and examination and for follow-up, if required. It was also observed that the applicant cannot be given treatment for the ailment, which he is sufering in C.P.R. Hospital, Kolhapur or in any Government Hospital in Kolhapur. Applicant contend that he is sufering from Lumbar and Cervical Spondylosis. In pursuant to the said order, the applicant was taken to Chougule Nursing Home. Applicant relies upon the medical certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More, attached to Abhinav Nursing Home. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was examined at Chougule Nursing Home and thereafter he was referred to Orthopedic Surgeon Dr.Sanjay More, attached to Abhinav Nursing Home. The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More is produced in support of the submission that the applicant requires medical treatment and surgery, which can be performed in the private nursing home. 3 The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More mentions as follows: "This is to certify that I, the undersigned Dr.Sanjay More, have gone through the all medical reports of Mr.Amol Jayvant Pawar, 33/M, R/o. Kolhapur and referred by Dr. Sangram Chougule, Neuro Physician, Kolhapur. As he is not responding to medical line of treatment for chronic lumbar PID with Radiography, he has been advised endoscopic laminectomy and Discectomy by a team of Neurosurgeon, Orthopedic Sargon and Neuro physician as early as possible." 4 Learned APP has tendered the report of Dr.Sanjay Padhye, Medical Oficer, Kiolhapur Central Prison, Kalamba. The applicant is detained in the said jail. The said report dated 8th January, 2020 mentions that it's a report in continuation of earlier report. As per the orders of the High Court, the patient was sent to Dr.Sanjay More, MS (Ortho) D.N.R. (ortho), as per the opinion and referral request of Neurosurgeon Dr.Sangram Chougule. As per the evaluation done by them of the said patient he requires a surgical intervention to treat him. 5 The patient wants operation done in a private hospital and hence he has moved application. The patient has been evaluated by experts and also in private hospital as per the courts permission. The xerox copy of the report of the private doctor which has been referred to herein above are annexed with the report. The report dated 8th January, 2020, is taken on record and marked "X" for identifcation. The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More, tendered on the earlier occasion, is marked as "X-1", for identifcation. 5 Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that undisputedly, the treatment is not available in C.P.R. Hospital or any other Government Hospital in Kolhapur. The applicant is in custody for a period of four years. The applicant is required to undergo surgery immediately. With a view to undergo surgery and the follow-up treatment, applicant be granted bail. Learned APP relied upon the report tendered by the medical oficer, Kolhapur Central Prison. The report refers to the medical certifcate dated 10th December, 2019, issued by Dr.Sanjay More. The report confrms that the applicant has been examined by the experts. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant can be granted bail on medical ground for a period of three months. 6 Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: (i) Bail Application No.1412 of 2019, is allowed; (ii) The Applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.31 of 2016, registered with Ajara Police Station, District– Kolhapur, for the period of three months frin the date of release on medical ground on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall intimate to concerned police station the details of his place of residence, details about his hospitalization and further details about treatment or surgery undergone by him; (iv) Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence while on bail; (v) On completion of period of three months from the date of release, the applicant shall surrender before Ajara Police Station, District–Kolhapur; (vi) Bail Application stands disposed of. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2386 OF 2021 Vishal Mangesh Yadav .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … Mr. N.M. Nadar h/f. Mr. S.V. Marwadi for the Applicant. Ms. A.A. Takalkar, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 13TH SEPTEMBER, 2021. P.C:- At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant, list the matter on 06/10/2021. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2386 OF 2021 Vishal Mangesh Yadav APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 23rd November, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 13/12/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2386 OF 2021 Vishal Mangesh Yadav APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 13th December, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 05/01/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: PMB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2386 OF 2021 PRADNYA MAKARAND BHOGALE signed by PRADNYA MAKARAND BHOGALE Date: 2023.01.05 17:10:30 +0530 Digitally VISHAL MANGESH YADAV ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT ------------ None for the applicant. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State. Mr. Vaibhav Pawar, PSI, Nalasopara Police Station is present. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : JANUARY 5, 2023. P.C. : 1. None appears for the applicant. 2. Only by way of an indulgence, list the matter on 06/01/2023. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2386 OF 2021 VISHAL MANGESH YADAV ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT ------------ Adv. Veerdhaval Kakade i/b Adv. Mrunal Jadhav for the applicant. Ms. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State. ------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : JANUARY 6, 2023. P.C. : 1. Considering the applicant is in custody for more than 4 years and 6 months, the Trial Court is requested to expedite the trial. I am informed that the charge has now been framed. 2. In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave to withdraw the application. The application is allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of accordingly. 3. In case the trial does not substantially proceed, liberty to file a fresh application after 6 months. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1119 OF 2015 Shri Rohit Jaywant Mane Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil for the Applicant. Mr. Arfan Sait, A.P.P. for Respondent - State. Mr. M.V. Damase, HC/1797, Tasgaon Police Station, Dist. Sangli, present. CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED : JULY 31, 2015 P.C. :- 1 The application is moved for bail as the applicant/accused is facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2), (F), (I), (N), 366, 452, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5,(L), 6, & 8 of POCSO Act in C.R. No.255 of 2014 registered with Tasgaon Police Station, District Sangli. 2 It is the case of the prosecution that applicant/accused is paternal uncle of the prosecutrix, who is 16 years and 11 months old and school going girl. That on 9.10.2014 applicant/accused who is 27 years old, took her out culvert near a temple and raped her. Thereafter again on 3.11.2014 when she was alone in the house he raped her. He was arrested on 4.11.2014. Hence, this bail application. 3 Learned Counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that there is a discrepancy of her statement before the Medical officer and her statement recorded by the police. In the statement before the Medical officer, she did not say of the second incident of rape but she mentioned that attempt to rape on 3.11.2014. However, in the statement recorded by the police she had stated that second time also he has raped. The learned counsel submitted that it appears that she has given different versions and, therefore, benefit is to be given to the applicant/accused by releasing him on bail. 4 The learned prosecutor opposed the application. He relied on the medical certificate and her statement recorded before the police and the statement of her father. He submitted that prosecutrix was minor i.e. below 16 years old. 5 Perused all the papers, medical certificate in favour of case of the prosecutrix. Considering the contents in the F.I.R. and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded by the police, it is prima facie a case of rape. The applicant/accused is paternal uncle of the prosecutrix and prosecutrix is minor. In view of this it is not a case to grant bail. 6 The Bail Application is rejected. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 3: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO.1323 OF 2024 Kadar Isak Khan @ Matanwala : Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents Adv. Keshav Chanvan, for the Applicant. Mr. A. R. Patil, APP for the State. CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J. DATE : 9TH FEBRUARY, 2024 P.C. : Issue notice to Respondents, returnable on 1st March, 2024. Learned APP waives notice for Respondent No.1. Notice to Respondent No.2 to be served through the Concerned Investigating Officer/Police Station. (KISHORE C. SANT, J.)

Order - Status 5: Diksha Rane 8. IA 339-24.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339/2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL 161/2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshar Chavan for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 1, 2024. P.C. : 1. I am informed that the appellant is in custody for more than 8 years. The notice has already been issued to the victim by this Court. The service report is awaited. The Investigating Officer to inform the victim the next date of hearing and that she has a right to be represented by an advocate or through legal aid. 2. Stand over to 6/3/2024 , high on board. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 161 of 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA .. APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS Mr. Keshav Chavan, for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 6, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned APP who seeks time to take instructions whether next date of hearing is communicated to the complainant in terms of order dated 01/03/2024, stand over to 07/03/2024. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshav Chavan for the applicant. Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for the State. API Lamkhade, Shil Daighar Police Station. ------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 7, 2024 P.C. : 1. Learned APP submits on instructions of the Investigating Officer that the victim though was not available at the residential address as she is presently in Uttar Pradesh, however telephonically the victim has intimated that she is in need of legal aid assistance. 2. Accordingly, Advocate Saakshat Relekar is requested to appear on behalf of the victim and assist this Court. 3. List the application on 11.03.2024 fairly high on board. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 11: Diksha Rane 19.ia.339-24.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshav Chavan for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. Adv. Saakshat Relekar for the respondent no.2 (appointed advocate). CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 11, 2024 P.C. : At the request of Mr. Saakshat Relekar, who has just been served with the copy of the appeal, stand over to 12/3/2024 . (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 14: Urmila Ingale 907-ia-339-24.doc 2024:BHC-AS:12137 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. RESPONDENTS Mr. Keshav Chavan, for the applicant. Mr.Saakshat Relekar, for respondent no.2. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 12, 2024 P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State. This is an interim application for bail in respect of the offence punishable under sections 376(2)(i), 506, 363 of the Indian Penal Code (hereafter 'IPC' for short) and under section 5(m) & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereafter referred to as "POCSO Act") registered vide C.R. No. 19 of 2016 with Daighar Police Station. The interim application is opposed by learned APP and learned counsel who has been appointed by this Court to represent the complainant. The applicant is convicted for the offence punishable under sections 5(m) & 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-. The applicant is convicted for other offences the sentence to which is to run concurrently. The applicant was arrested on 30/01/2016 and is now in custody for more than 8 years and 2 months. The applicant has undoubtedly been committed for a serious offence. The appeal has been admitted and will be heard finally in due course. The applicant has undergone custody for more than half of the sentence imposed by the trial Court up till now. Prior to the substitution of section 6 of POCSO Act with effect from 16/08/2019 substituted by Act 25 of 2019., the punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault was rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. 2/5 Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 invited my attention to the findings recorded by the trial Court. It is submitted that on the basis of the evidence on record, for cogent reasons, the trial Court has rightly convicted the applicant for such a serious offence. It is therefore submitted that the applicant is not entitled for bail and instead of enlarging the applicant on bail, the appeal itself be heard finally. My attention is invited to the decision of the Supreme Court of India in State of U.P. Vs. Sonu Kushwaha 1 to contend that the trial Court has rightly held the accused guilty of offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault punishable under section 6 of POCSO Act. My attention is also invited to the decision of the Supreme Court in 2 Nawabuddin Vs. State of Uttarakhand to submit that no leniency can be shown to an accused who has committed the offences under the POCSO Act and particularly when the same is proved by adequate evidence before a Court of law. These decisions will undoubtedly guide this Court when the appeal is finally heard on merits. It is not possible for me to hear the appeal finally at this 1 Criminal Appeal No. 1633 of 2023 dated 05/07/2023 2 Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 2022 dated 08/02/2022 stage considering the pendency of the old matters. The appeal is unlikely to be heard finally any time soon in the near future. Considering that the applicant is 70 years of age and has already undergone 8 years and 2 months of his substantive sentence, in my opinion, the applicant can be enlarged on bail. The applicant is not reported to have any criminal antecedents. Considering that the victim is residing in the same vicinity, on instructions, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant will reside outside Mumbai/ Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts. The statement is accepted. Hence, the following order :- O R D E R (a) The interim application is allowed. (b) The applicant-Kadar Isak Khan @ Matanwala in connection with C.R. No.19 of 2016 registered with Daighar Police Station shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount. (c) The applicant is permitted to furnish cash bail surety in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- for a period of 6 weeks in lieu of surety. (d) The applicant shall report to the trial Court once in a year, on the first Monday of the concerned month between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. commencing from April 2024. (e) The applicant shall not enter Mumbai/ Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts after being released on bail except for reporting to the trial Court. (f) The applicant shall inform the trial Court as well as the investigating officer the contact details as well as residential address while residing outside Mumbai/Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts. (g) The applicant shall remain present at the time of hearing of this appeal. The interim application is disposed of. I appreciate the valuable assistance rendered by Mr.Saakshat Relekar, the learned Advocate, who appeared on behalf of respondent No.2 at my request in this proceeding. His engagement be regularized by the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1279 OF 2018 Chetan Bhanudas Randhire ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Adv. Mayur D. Sapkale For Applicant Adv. A. A. TAkalkar APP for State CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J DATE : 4th July, 2018 P.C. : At the request of learned APP, Stand over to 11/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1279 OF 2018 Chetan Bhanudas Randhire ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Adv. Mayur D. Sapkale For Applicant Adv. A. A. Takalkar APP for State CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J DATE : 11th July, 2018 P.C. : Mentioned out of turn. Stand over to 18/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: BA.1279-2018.doc Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1279 OF 2018 CHETAN BHANUDAS RANDHIRE ..APPLICANT Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT Mr. M.D. Sapkale for applicant. Ms. A.A. Takalkar, APP for State. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 9th August 2018. P.C.: 1] This is an application under Section 439 of the Cr. P.C for bail in CR No.I216 of 2016 dated 6.12.2016 registered with Thanenagar Police Station, Thane now transferred under sections 420, 181, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 of the Indian Penal Code. 2] Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. Perused the chargesheet. 3] The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, the role attributed to the present is same and/or similar to that has been assigned to coaccused Amar M. Bhadrige who has been released on by by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thane by its Order dated 6th March 2017. The learned APP fairly conceded to the said fact. 1/2 4] Perusal of the chargesheet would indicate that, the present applicant has been assigned with same and/or similar role as that of the coaccused Amar M. Bhadrige who has been directed to be released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thane by its Order dated 6th March 2017 and therefore the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. Hence, the following Order: a] Applicant Chetan Bhanudas Randhire be released on his executing P.B. and S.B of Rs.40,000/ (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amiount. b] After his release from Jail, the applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on every first Monday of the month between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 hours till conclusion of trial. c] The applicant shall furnish his photograph, address proof and shall not involve in any such offence. 5] Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (A.S.GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sangpal Gulabrao Jamnik ] Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra ] Respondent Ms. Mayuri Hatle, for the Applicant. Smt.Rutuja Abmekar, APP for the State. CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE, J DATE : 12th OCTOBER, 2022. P.C. 1] Since the offences invoke against the Applicant are under the provisions of POCSO Act, let the complainant be added as party-Respondent No.2. 2] After necessary amendment is being carried out, Issue notice to Respondent No.2 returnable on 29.11.2022. 3] Let the learned APP intimate the complainant through the Investigating Officer about her impleadment in the application and also apprise her of her right of being represented through counsel of her choice or through legal aid. [BHARATI DANGRE, J]

Order - Status 6: Urmila Ingale IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Digitally signed by URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Date: 2022.11.30 10:52:53 +0530 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2501 OF 2021 Mr. Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik ..Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Ms. Mayuri D. Hatl,e for applicant. Ms. P.N. Dabholkar, APP for respondent-State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 29, 2022 P.C. : 1. The Learned APP submits that the complainant has been served and she wants to be represented through legal aid. Mr. Akshay Pai is requested to appear on behalf of the complainant and represent her. 2. List the matter on 06/12/2022. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 6th December, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 16/12/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Ms. Mayuri D. Hatle for Applicant. Ms. G. P. Mulekar, APP for State. Mr. Akshay Pai for Respondent No. 2 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 16th December, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 20/12/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 20th December, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 05/01/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2501 OF 2021 SAGAR @ SANGPAL GULABRAO JAMNIK ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Ms. Mayuri D. Hatle for the applicant. Mr. Akshay Pai for respondent No.2. Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for the State. ------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : JANUARY 5, 2023. P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave to withdraw the application. A request is made to expedite the trial as the applicant is in custody since 22/09/2020. The FIR is lodged on 28/07/2020. Considering that the applicant is in custody for more than 2 years and 3 months, the trial Court is requested to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of six months from today. In any case, considering that the applicant is incarcerated for this long a period, the trial Court is requested to record the evidence of the child within a period of one month from the date when this order is produced on record. 3. Liberty to apply for bail in case the trial does not substantially proceed during the period of six months from today. 4. Subject to what is observed hereinabove, the application is allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of. 5. I appreciate the assistance rendered by Mr. Pai, learned advocate, who was requested to appear on behalf of the victim. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2501 OF 2021 Sagar @ Sang Pal Gulabrao Jamnik Versus...Applicant ...RespondentThe State Of Maharashtra...Respondent ____ None for the Applicant Ms. Anamika Mlahotra, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : $28^{text{th}}$ AUGUST 2023. P.C. : The letter dated 5 th July 2023 is received from District Judge-7 and Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, for extension of one year time for disposal of Special (POCSO) Case No. 506/2020. Considering the reasons mentioned in the letter, one year time is extended to dispose of Special (POCSO) Case No. 506/2020. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Order - Status 7: 503-ba-1383-18 Nalawade FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1383 OF 2018 Pradip A. Ramchandani vs. The State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memorandam of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. S.N. Naik i/by R.D.Suryawanshi for the applicant. Mrs. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the RespondentState. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 15th June, 2018 P.C. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, during the pendency of the present application the police have submitted charge sheet. In view of the change in circumstance, he seeks leave to withdraw the present application with liberty to file a fresh application for bail before the Trial Court. Leave and liberty granted. Disposed off as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. (A.S.GADKARI, J.) Page-1/1

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 7th June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 04/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 4th July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 29/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 22nd August, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned.Stand over to 16/09/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 16th September, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 09/10/2019 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 9th October, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 15/11/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 15th November, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 06/12/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1482 OF 2019 Roshan Sunil Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent …... …... Mr.Silvin Y. Kale, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.A.A. Takalkar, APP APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : DECEMBER 20, 2019. P.C. : The applicants in both the applications were arrested in connection with C.R.No.I–291 of 2018, registered with Panvel City Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for the ofence punishable under Section 302j read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2 The case of the prosecution is that on 30th June, 2018, the victim/complainant was waiting at rickshaw stand. Accused Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde spoke to the victim and told him that he want to travel at Karanjade and the fare was fied at Rs.60/-. He boarded rickshaw. The victim dropped him at Karanjade. He paid Rs.50/- towards the fare although it was fied to be Rs.60/-. The victim demanded the balance amount. Accused Avi alias Ajinkya told him that he is associate of Rajesh Kaikadia and slapped him. The victim also slapped him. Thereafter, the victim went towards Panvel railway station and was waiting at rickshaw stand. At about 22:30 hrs., he went for smoking cigarette. Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde came and questioned him as to why he charges heavy fare and left the place. After some time, Ajinkya Shinde, Babu Kaikadia and two other persons approached the victim. Ajinkya Shinde assaulted him with iron rod in his head. As a result the victim fell down. Babu Kaikadia assaulted by knife and two other persons assaulted the victim by fst blows. Babu Kaikadia then assaulted him on head. The mother and wife of the victim reached the spot. Babu Kaikadia also assaulted his mother and all of them fled away from the place of incident. The victim was taken to the hospital. His statement was recorded, which was treated as First Information Report. Subsequently, victim succumbed to the injuries and charge under Section 302 of IPC was invoked. 3 Learned counsel for the applicant appearing for both the applicants submitted that there are major discrepancies in the evidence of witnesses. There are contradictions in the statements of eye witnesses. Applicants are falsely implicated,. There is no evidence against the applicant Roshan Pawar, the eye witnesses have given contradictory versions about the role played by him. Although, the applicant was identifed, subsequent to identifcation, diferent role is attributed to the said applicant. The version of both the eye witnesses were contradictory to each other. The applicants are in custody from the date of arrest and further detention is not necessary. Co-accused Iqbal Abdul Kadir Shaha has been granted bail by this Court. 4 Learned APP submitted that the role has been assigned to both the applicants. Applicant Avinash had picked up quarrel with the deceased. Thereafter, he came along with other accused and the victim was assaulted by weapons. The applicants are identifed by the eye witnesses. Thus, there is suficient evidence against the applicant and bail may not be granted. 5 Having heard both the sides. I have perused the charge–sheet. The frst informant is the victim of the crime. He has stated that accused Avi alias Ajinkya had quarreled with him. Subsequently, he came along with the other accused. In the frst information report, it is stated that Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde had assaulted the victim on his head by iron rod and Babu Kaikadia had assaulted by knife. Two unknown persons had allegedly caught hold of the victim. Thus, the role of assault is attributed to Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde and Babu Kaikadia. During the course of investigation, statement of Naziya and Sherbano were recorded. Naziya had stated in a statement under Section 164 that the victim was assaulted by Avi alias Ajinkya and others. Avi alias Ajinkya was holding iron rod and the other short person was holding knife. The victim was assaulted by iron rod on his head and the other person had assaulted by knife. Her statement was also recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., which is in consonance with her earlier statement. Thus, the said witness categorically stated that Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde had assaulted the victim by iron rod on his head and other persons assaulted by knife. Statement of Sherbano was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She has stated that accused Avi alias Ajinkya and others had assaulted the victim. The identifcation parade was conducted. In the parade Naziya has identifed accused Roshan Pawar and stated that Roshan Pawar had assaulted victim by knife. The other witness Ayesha has also identifed Roshan Pawar and during the identifcation stated that he had assaulted the victim by fst blows. Thus, apparently, there are discrepancies in the evidence with regards to the role played by Roshan Pawar in the FIR, statement of eye witnesses and the identifcation parade. However, as far as Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde, is concerned, specifc overtact has been attributed to him. There is consistency in the evidence of witnesses. He was the cause of quarrel and incident of murder. The victim as well as other witnesses have attributed him role of assault. In this circumstances, applicant Roshan Pawar can be granted bail, however, applicant Ajinkya @ Avinash Shinde is not entitled for bail. 7 Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: (i) Bail Application No.1482 of 2019, is allowed and disposed of; (ii) Applicant Roshan Sunil Pawar, is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.I– 291 of 2018, registered with Panvel City Police Station, Navi Mumbai, on his eiecuting P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant Roshan Sunil Pawar, shall attend the concerned police station once in a month on frst Saturday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, till the conclusion of the trial; (iv) Bail Application No.1483 of 2019, is rejected. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)