1
B.A. 53/24
MHCC020003622024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No.53 OF 2024
Rajesh Bobhate @ Ravi @ Prasadrao
S/o Damodar Bobhate
Age 35 years, Room No.A/04,
3rd floor, Manohar Shilpa Co. Hsg.,
Near Mumbai Goa Highway,
Post Kalmath, Tal. Kankavli,
Sindhudurga.
… Applicant
– Versus The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of DCB CID, Unit-10,
Andheri (E) vide Cr. No.41/2023)
… Respondent
Appearance :Adv. V.V. Dushing a/w Adv. Sangram Jadhav for the applicant.
APP Iqbal Solkar for the respondent / State
CORAM : RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 01/02/2024
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,
2
B.A. 53/24
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.
It is alleged by the applicant / accused that he is innocent
and falsely implicated in the present case. The accused is arrested on
25.04.2023.
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 victim
were made to be arrested by police at Sharjah and accused demanded
lakhs of rupees to release them.
3
6.
B.A. 53/24
It is alleged that the person named as Ravi @ Prasadrao is
Mr. Rajesh Damodhar Bobhate – the applicant. 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 the present applicant /
accused handed over said substances in a cake to Cletan Rodgries who
was about to leave India for journey to Sharjah. It is alleged that the
applicant 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 victim was carrying Narcotics substance, for the purpose to
rope them in the prosecution at Sharjah.
7.
It is contention of the applicant that the charge sheet is
already filed. Further incarceration is not necessary. The Modus
operandi of the accused is to induce the persons by offering job at UAE,
collect amount from them. While said person was travelling to abroad,
handover the cake or trophy containing Narcotics substance to them.
When said person is about to reach to Dubai, make phone call at
Sharjah and to inform the Airport Authorities about such Narcotics
substance and to see that the victim will be apprehended by the Sharjah
Police. The applicant was suppressing his identity. He was also
impersonating by showing his identity as Ravi @ Prasadrao. It is the
contention of the applicant / accused that as Section 120(B) is removed
by the prosecution, now there is no evidence that he was also having
4
B.A. 53/24
role in the commission of offence. According to prosecution there is
evidence to show that he is the person who handed over such
contraband articles through victim. He alongwith co-accused have
specific role in the commission of offence. The applicant / accused at
the instance of accused No.1 used to call the victims and offer them to
travel abroad. There is evidence of his involvement in offence. There is
CCTV footage. He suppressed his identity. It is important to note that
the accused used to handover cake or trophy containing narcotic
substance and made the victims to be apprehended by police at Sharaja.
There is repetition of crime with several persons. Considering the
modus operandi of the accused, seriousness of the crime and major role
played by the accused, I am of the view that the accused is not entitled
to be released on bail. Hence, I pass the following order :
ORDER
Criminal Bail Application No.53 of 2024 is rejected and disposed off
accordingly.
Date : 01/02/2024
Dictated on
: 01.02.2024
Transcribed on
: 02.02.2024
Signed by HHJ on : 05.02.2024
( RAJESH A. SASNE )
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.
5
B.A. 53/24
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
05/02/2024
5.55 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 01/02/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
05/02/2024
ORDER uploaded on
05/02/2024