1
B.A. 365/24
MHCC020030022024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No.365 OF 2024
Anthony Paul
Age : 34 years, R/o Room No.202,
C-1, Woodland Complex,
Near Holycross High School,
Sheetalnagar, Mira Road (E)
… Applicant
– Versus The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of DCB CID, Unit-10,
Andheri (E) vide Cr. No.41/2023)
… Respondent
Appearance :Adv. Aniket Tawade for the applicant.
APP Iqbal Solkar for the respondent / State
CORAM : RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 20/03/2024
ORDER
This is bail application by the accused u/sec.439 of The
Criminal Procedure Code for releasing him on bail in connection with
C.R.No.41/2023 registered with DCB CID, Unit-10, Mumbai for the
commission of offences punishable u/sec.419, 420, 465, 467,
471,385,201,34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 23, 24, 8(B),(i)
(A),29 N.D.P.S. Act 1985.

2
2.

B.A. 365/24
It is alleged by the applicant / accused that he is innocent
and falsely implicated in the present case. The accused is arrested on
24.04.2023.

He
has
undergone
custodial
interrogation.

The
investigation is completed. There is no point in keeping accused behind
bars till conclusion of trial. He is the permanent resident of his given
address therefore he prayed for releasing him on bail.
3.

The prosecution opposed the application by filing reply
vide Exh.2. It is the contention of the prosecution that if accused is
released on bail there are chances of flee from justice. If accused is
released on bail there are chances of threatening of prosecution
witnesses and tampering of prosecution evidence. Hence, prosecution
prayed for rejection of the application.
4.

Read the application, say filed by the prosecution. Heard
the ld. Advocate for the applicant, ld. APP for the respondent / State.
5.

It is the case of the prosecution that accused Anthony Alex
Paul and Rajesh @ Ravi @ Prasad Rao induced Crisen Parera and
Rushikesh Pandya, Ken Rodriges, Cletan Rodgries, Monisha Demelo by
offering them job in Dubai, made them to travel to Sharjah. On reaching
there no job was offered to them. In addition to this the accused issued
forged air ticket for return to India. They also handed over memento/
trophy or cake containing contraband Narcotics substance. These
victims were made to be arrested by police at Sharjah and accused
demanded lakhs of rupees to release them.

3
6.

B.A. 365/24
It is alleged that the person named as Ravi @ Prasadrao is
Mr. Rajesh Damodhar Bobhate co-accused. According to the prosecution
it is revealed that Crisen Parera and Cletan Rodgries are arrested and
convicted at Dubai. In the said conviction order it is noted that Cletan
Rodgries was arrested by the Airport Authorities as he was carrying cake
containing Narcotics substance and such information was furnished on
phone from India. It is alleged that Rajesh Damodhar Bobhate coaccused handed over said substances in a cake to Cletan Rodgries who
was about to leave India for journey to Sharjah. It is alleged that Rajesh
Damodhar Bobhate co-accused was public officer and he was
impersonated himself as Ravi Prasad Roy. He also handed over trophy
having Narcotics substance therein to victim Crisen Parera. There is
evidence of CCTV footage. It is also alleged that the accused himself
informed on phone to Sharjah police that victims was carrying Narcotics
substance, for the purpose to rope them in the prosecution at Sharjah.

7.

According to the prosecution this applicant / accused is
also involved in the activity of sending victim to Sharjah and to rope
them in the prosecution at Sharjah. According to the prosecution victim
Clentan Rodgries has faced the prosecution at Sharjah and has been
convicted for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1 crore 10 lakhs. The ld
advocate for the applicant submits that the prosecution has not
produced copy of any judgment to satisfy the said contention. We are
not at the stage of trial and required the proof of any fact. The
statement of prosecution at this prima facie stage can be relied upon
and therefore, the contentions raised about non production of copy of
judgment is not acceptable.

4
8.

B.A. 365/24
According to the prosecution during the course of
investigation it is revealed that the present applicant had made phone
call at Sharjah and informed that the victim is carrying Narcotics
substance. The prosecution has material to satisfy this allegation
showing vital role of the applicant in the present crime. According to
the prosecution this accused is also involved in the activity of handing
over cake containing narcotic substance to the victim. It is also the case
of the prosecution that the applicant has exported the narcotic
substance to abroad. The prosecution also suspect the international
racket behind the crime. It is alleged that the applicant’s mobile phone
has been used by him in the offence. The ld advocate for the applicant
tried to raise the dispute about authenticity of documents related to the
mobile handset. However, it is required to considered that there is
substance in the contention of the prosecution that the present
applicant had made phone call to Sharjah for the purpose to rope the
victim in the false offence related to the narcotic substance.

9.

One more role attributed to the present applicant is that he
procured memento/ trophy which was handed over to the victim and
which was found containing narcotic substance. The record shows that
previous bail application of the applicant has been rejected by the
Sessions Court when the charge sheet was pending before the Sessions
Court. In the order of ld Metropolitan Magistrate it is observed that
further investigation u/Sec.173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is
going on. The Investigating Officer will file documents from Sharjah
and Dubai. There is also observation that the applicant was willing to
help the informant by showing his acquaintance. He told expenses of
5
B.A. 365/24
Rs.80 lakhs to release her daughter. He further extended the help of
advocate Jora Merchant at the cost of Rs.28 lakhs. It is also observed
that the applicant / accused repeatedly insisted the informant to pay the
said amount to release the victim. It is also observed that the statement
of Amit Chheda shows that the applicant had purchased the poppy
seeds from his shop then he had purchased trophy of particular size
from shop of Akshay Naik. From the statement of Vijay Ahir it is
revealed that the applicant had taken printout of return ticket from his
shop. In the statement of witness Bablu Modi it is stated that the
applicant has used his sim card to make the call at Sharjah Airport
Authority.

10.

There is allegation against the applicant that he had kept
narcotic substance in the trophy and cake and thereafter handed over it
to the victim. The statement of Melesa Cristo also shows the same
allegation like other victim. It was revealed that the applicant / accused
extended the help at the cost of $ 98,000/- when there was arrest at
Sharjah in NDPS case. It shows modus operandi of the accused. The
accused acted in conspiracy, there was plan in their mind to commit this
crime. The applicant / accused has played vital role in the commission
of this offence. Considering the nature of offence and role attributed to
the present applicant / accused, there are every chances that if
applicant / accused is released on bail he will tamper with the
prosecution evidence. There will be threat to the prosecution witness.
There are also chances that the applicant will flee away from the justice.
The bail application of co-accused Rajesh is also rejected. No different
rule can be applied against the present applicant / accused. Hence, in
my view the applicant / accused is not entitled for the bail. In the result,
6
B.A. 365/24
I pass the following order :
ORDER
Criminal Bail Application No.365 of 2024 is rejected and disposed of
accordingly.
Date : 20/03/2024
Dictated on
: 20.03.2024
Transcribed on
: 21.03.2024
Signed by HHJ on : 22.03.2024
( RAJESH A. SASNE )
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

7
B.A. 365/24
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
22/03/2024
2.53 p.m.

UPLOAD DATE
TIME
J.S. Chavan
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge Shri. R.A
Room No.)
Sasne, Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 20/03/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
22/03/2024
ORDER uploaded on
22/03/2024