Bail Application No.1603/2022.
MHCC020087452022
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE MUMBAI,
AT GR. MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1603 OF 2022.
IN
C.R. NO. 248 OF 2022.
Rohit Santosh Gupta
… Applicant.
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Dadar Railway Police
Station, Vide C.R.No. 248/2022.)
…Respondent.
Appearances :
Ld. Adv. Ms. Vijay Agale for the Applicant.
Ld. APP. Mr. Abhijit Gondwal for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R.NO.37)
DATED : 07TH JULY, 2022
ORAL ORDER
By this application the applicants Rohit Santosh Gupta
being accused in C.R.No. 258/2022 registered with Dadar Railway
Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 379 of the
Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to as, “IPC”) seeks bail under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short, “CrPC”).
Page 1 of 4
Bail Application No.1603/2022.
THE CASE OF PROSECUTION IN SHORT ENSUES AS UNDER;
2.
The informant lodged a complaint with the respondent
agency with regard to her stolen mobile. Upon investigation it was
found with an individual Babu Chanchal, who in turn disclosed that the
said mobile was sold to him by the applicant/accused. Accordingly,
applicant/accused was apprehended and upon appropriate compliances
was put under arrest.
3.
Ld.
advocate
for
applicant/accused
states
that
the
applicant/accused are falsely implicated and there is no any material to
connect them in the alleged crime. It is further submitted that the
applicant/accused is arrested on suspicion and been arrested on the
spot. Further investigation is complete and nothing is to be recovered.
Hence, Ld. advocate for applicant/accused prayed for enlargement of
the applicant/accused on bail.
4.
Per contra the prosecution has filed their reply vide exhibit
2, and inter alia have resisted the application upon various grounds. It is
categorically stated that, the role of the Applicants/accused has been
clearly located in the present crime and there are prior criminal
antecedents of similar nature to the discredit of the applicant/accused.
Further investigation is in progress and chargesheet is yet to be filed.
Further the prosecution apprehends for abscondence and tampering of
evidence if the applicant/accused is enlarged on bail. Hence, the
learned prosecutor prayed for rejection of application.
5.
Heard learned advocate for Applicant/accused, and learned
prosecutor for the state. Perused application and reply.
Page 2 of 4
Bail Application No.1603/2022.
6.
On meticulous examination of case record it evinces to me
that, the role of the Applicants/accused is in primafacie established
during the course of investigation. Moreover, the abysmal track record
to the discredit of the applicant/accused speaks in quantum.
7.
It is well settled that, while considering an application for
grant of bail, the Court is required to see whether the primafacie case
exists or not. It is not necessary to make roving enquiry or examine the
merits of prosecution’s case. Considering the case in hand it is evident
that the Applicants/accused is habitual in committing such crimes.
Moreover, the applicant/accused already enlarged on bail in the other
offences and also have transgressed the bail conditions therein. Thus,
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the appalling
track record of the applicant/accused, his role cannot be negated, and
the prayer for enlargement on bail deserves no consideration. Also,
granting of bail would naturally derail the momentum of investigation.
In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, I hold that, as the application
being devoid of merits needs to be rejected. Hence, order infra: –
ORDER
Bail Application No. 1603/2022 stands rejected and
disposed of accordingly.
Date : 07.07.2022
Dictated on
: 07.07.2022
Transcribed on : 07.07.2022
HHJ signed on : 08.07.2022
Digitally signed
DR.
by DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
ABHAY
AVINASH JOGLEKAR
Date: 2022.07.08
JOGLEKAR 17:26:29 +0530
(DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (C.R.No.37)
Page 3 of 4
Bail Application No.1603/2022.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
07.07.2022
05.25 p.m.
Mahendrasing D. Patil
Stenographer (GradeI)
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR
(Court Room No. 37)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
07.07.2022
of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by
P.O. on
08.07.2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded
on
08.07.2022
Page 4 of 4