Order 1

Order Details: Bail Order
Pdf Text: C. C. No. 1986 PW 2021 State Vs Sushil Mishra
CNR-MHMM18-004598-2021
ORDER BELOW BAIL APPLICATION NO.3546/2021
1. Perused record. Heard Ld. Advocate for the applicant/accused and
Ld. A.P.P.
2. The present application is filed under Section 437 of Code of
Criminal Procedure for bail. The main ground assigned are, the
investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed, accused is innocent,
majority of the offences are bailable, there are dependants on the accused,
besides various legal aspects of the matter.
3. Ld. A.P.P. objected to it mainly on the ground that the allegations
are serious. Other accused persons are absconded. There noticed active
involvement of the accused in the incidence. There is possibility of
tampering, therefore, application shall be rejected.
4. The submissions of both the parties are in tune with their respective
contentions. In addition to those submissions Ld. Advocate for the
applicant relied on judgments of Supreme Court in, Ashok Dhingra Vs
N.C.T. Delhi (2000 (9) S.C.C. 533, Mehaboob Mohammad Sayeed Vs State of
Maharashtra (AIR 2002 Supreme Court 482) and Sanjay Chandra Vs C.B.I. (2012
(1) S.C.C. 40, and submitted that bail is a rule and jail is an exception. The
accused/applicant shall not be allowed to detain as punishment at this pre-
trial stage as there is violation of fundamental right of liberty.
5. It is alleged that accused alongwith other persons duped informant
to the tune of Rs.20 lacs under the garb of providing admissions to some
courses. Admittedly, investigation is over and accused is in custody since
the date of his arrest i.e. 22.07.2021. The record shows that the
investigation relating to him is over. The whole evidence is of
documentary nature which is already collected and the possessors of those
documents are either bank or third persons. Thus, possibility of tampering
is almost nil. The accused is resident of Mumbai itself. The possibility of
commencement of trial and its conclusion in near future appears difficult.
-- 1 of 2 --
C. C. No. 1986 PW 2021 State Vs Sushil Mishra
CNR-MHMM18-004598-2021
Except an offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code,
the remaining offences are bailable. In such a situation the citations relied
by Ld. Advocate and settled principles therein needs due consideration.
The pre-trial detention should not act either as punishment or punitive
detention. There is mandate on the part of this court that such detention
should not be allowed to continue as punishment.
6. Accused is resident of Mumbai itself. He have no criminal
antecedents. It is mentioned in the application and as submitted that the
accused is the only earning member of his family and there are
dependants on him. He is ready to remain abide the conditions, if any,
imposed. The apprehension expressed by Ld. Public Prosecutor can be
addressed by imposing certain conditions and allowing release after
furnishing bail for heavy bail amount. Accordingly, following order :
ORDER
a. Accused is released on bail on his furnishing P.B. and S.B. of
Rs.50,000/-.
b. Accused shall furnish his detailed address, addresses of sureties and
proofs thereof.
c. Accused shall remain present in this court immediately after his
release from jail for framing of charge and shall also remain present
during trial.
d. Accused shall inform his change of address, if any, until conclusion
of trial.
e. Permission granted to deposit cash security instead of surety bond.
Sd/-
MUMBAI (KOMALSING RAJPUT)
DATE – 24.09.2021 M.M., 12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI
-- 2 of 2 --