Interim Order 2

Order Details: Bail Order
Pdf Text: C. C. No. 807 PW 2023 State Vs John and ors.
CNR No.MHMM18-003057-2023
COMMON ORDER BELOW FOLLOWING BAIL APPLICATIONS
Nandkumar M. Chandrashekhar (A. No.2), Exh.6
Ayyappan Murugsen (A. No.4), Exh.5
Premsagar Putra Ramswarup (A. No.5), Exh.8
Akaran Ravindra Nathan (A. No.6), Exh.7
Santoshkumar Gopinath Varma (A. No.7), Exh.4
1. Perused record. Heard Ld. Advocates for all the accused
persons/applicants. Heard Ld. A.P.P.
2. These three applications are filed by accused persons above named
on various grounds. The common grounds raised are, they are innocent
and falsely implicated. Investigation relating to them is over. Accused are
ready to remain abide by the conditions. During investigation and in
future also they had been and they will cooperate. The maximum
punishment provided is seven years. It is also contended that they should
be witnesses and not accused. But are implicated without any cogent
basis. They have no criminal antecedents. There are dependents on them.
They are from respectable families and though from other States will
remain present for trial.
3. Ld. A.P.P. objected to it stating that allegations are serious.
Involvement of the accused persons transpired in the incidence. There are
several offences lodged against there. There is possibility of tampering
and absconding, besides other grounds.
4. The arguments of all the parties are in tune with their respective
contentions. Ld. Advocate for the accused/applicant also relied on certain
citations.
5. Admittedly investigation is completed and charge sheet has already
been filed. The application filed by Mr. Akaran Ravindra Natham, and
Mr. Premsagar Ramswaroop, if considered in the light of the contents of
-- 1 of 3 --
C. C. No. 807 PW 2023 State Vs John and ors.
CNR No.MHMM18-003057-2023
the charge sheet i.e. material collected during investigation, it reflects that
only role attributed to them is at some amount is transferred to the
account of Mr. Akaran and another accused Mr. Premsagar, helped to
procure SIM Cards. All the material relating to these facts already
collected which mainly constitutes documentary evidence in custody of
third persons.
6. Same is the case of two applicants/accused, Mr. Ayyappan
Murugsen and Mr. Santoshkumar Gopinath Varma. No serious role
attributed to them. They assisted the main accused persons for executing
the disputed transaction. The reasons discussed above are also applicable
to them.
7. Somewhat serious role is attributed to accused/applicant Mr.
Nandkumar, alleging that he collected the gold and on his information
furnish by main accused persons were detained. The record reflects that
said accused/applicant collected gold from the shop and after detaining by
investigating agency assisted them to get executed the trap for
apprehending main accused persons. It is not possible without his
assistance. Thus, there appears substance in the submissions of Ld.
Advocate that he helped the investigating agency, to nab the main
culprits, atleast to the extent of consideration of the bail application.
8. The relevant evidence in that regard is already collected. All the
witnesses are interested persons and evidence mainly constitutes
documentary evidence. Thus, in respect of accused also the possibility of
tampering is almost nil.
9. The offence is triable by this court itself. Accused are ready to
remain abide by the conditions. They are of tender age and earning
members of their respective families. The evidence is bulky and mainly of
electronic transactions done across India. The conclusion of trial, will take
-- 2 of 3 --
C. C. No. 807 PW 2023 State Vs John and ors.
CNR No.MHMM18-003057-2023
much time. Pre-trial detention is not justified. The amount involved is not
much high. Considering all these legal and factual aspects of the matter
and grounds assigned in the bail application, following order -
ORDER
a. All the bail applications, Exhs.4 to 8, filed by applicants/accused
Nandkumar M. Chandrashekhar (A. No.2), Ayyappan Murugsen (A.
No.4), Premsagar Putra Ramswarup (A. No.5), Akaran Ravindra Nathan
(A. No.6) and Santoshkumar Gopinath Varma (A. No.7), are allowed.
b. The above accused persons/applicants, are released on bail on their
furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.30,000/- each.
c. Permission granted to furnish one or more sureties for the amounts
of surety bond ordered subject to condition that one of the sureties must
be either from Government service or having landed property.
d. One month time is allowed to furnish S.B., in the mean time
permission granted to deposit cash security provisionally in substitution
of surety bond for one month.
e. It is further directed that the accused persons shall also furnish their
detailed addresses, names and addresses of their parents and sureties, in a
printed format, along with their addresses and I.D. proofs.
f. Accused persons shall not tamper with prosecution evidence and
shall remain present before Investigating Officer, whenever called by him.
MUMBAI (KOMALSING RAJPUT)
DATE – 29.05.2023 M.M., 12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI
-- 3 of 3 --