1
BA 1738/22
MHCC020094612022
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION No.1738 OF 2022
Nitin Kisan Khatri
Age 40 years, Occ Service
Residing at G19, Old Barrack
No.T58, Chembur Colony,
Near Municipal School, Chembur Camp,
Chembur, Mumbai 400 074.
The State of Maharashtra
(Through Chembur P. Stn.
Cr. No.687/2021)
… Applicant
Versus
… Respondent
Appearance :
Advocate Keshav Chavan for applicant.
Mr. R.A. Mahakal, A.P.P. for respondent.
CORAM : SHRI. S.D. KULKARNI,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 29/07/2022.
ORDER
1.
This is an application filed by the accused u/sec.439 of
Criminal Procedure Code for releasing him on bail.
2.
It is alleged by the applicant / accused that he was arrested
on 30.06.200 by Chembur Police Station in connection with
C.R.No.687/21 for the commission of offence punishable u/sec.307,
326, 504, 141, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 332 of IPC. The applicant /
accused undergone police custody lateron, he was remanded to judicial
2
BA 1738/22
custody.
3.
The contention of the applicant / accused that he has
falsely implicated in this case. The injured has been discharged from the
hospital. He has sustained only simple injury. The alleged incident took
place in the spur of moment. The police has carried out the
investigation and filed chargesheet in the Court therefore, custodial
interrogation of the applicant / accused is not justified. The applicant /
accused is a permanent resident of Mumbai therefore, there is no
possibility of flee away from the justice. The applicant / accused is
ready to abide all the conditions if any imposed on him while releasing
him on bail.
4.
The prosecution opposed the bail application on a ground
that many offences registered against the applicant / accused.
Considering his criminal antecedents he was deportation for about one
year u/sec. 56 of the Mumbai Police Act then also he entered in a city
by violating the said condition and beaten the informant. On going
through the report it reveals that the applicant / accused has taken an
active role in the commission of offence. Hence prayed for rejection of
the application.
5.
Perused application, say filed by the prosecution. Heard
both the advocates at length.
6.
The allegation against the accused that applicant that
accused with the help of deadly weapon caused injury to the informant
and other witnesses. The cross case was registered against him. On
going through the prosecution reply it reveals that many cases are
3
BA 1738/22
registered against the applicant / accused. The offence is serious in
nature. The informant, witnesses and this accused persons are residing
in the same locality. Therefore, if accused release on bail there is
possibility of threatening the prosecution witnesses. There is possibility
of tampering the prosecution evidence. Considering the previous
criminal antecedents there is possibility of again scuffle in between both
the parties. Therefore, in my opinion applicant / accused is not entitled
to release on bail. Though the chargesheet is filed but there is
possibility of threatening the prosecution witnesses therefore, in my
opinion applicant / accused is not entitled to release on bail.
Considering this, I pass the following order :
ORDER
1]
Bail Application No.1738 of 2022 stands rejected.
SANTOSH
DIGAMBAR
KULKARNI
Date : 29/07/2022.
Digitally signed
by SANTOSH
DIGAMBAR
KULKARNI
Date:
2022.08.03
16:36:54 +0530
( S.D. Kulkarni )
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed by HHJ on
: 29.07.2022
: 30.07.2022
: 01.08.2022
4
BA 1738/22
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
02/08/2022
06:00 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE
TIME
J.S. Chavan
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge Shri.
Room No.)
S.D. Kulkarni
Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 29/07/2022
ORDER signed by P.O. on
01/08/2022
ORDER uploaded on
02/08/2022