CNR MHNS010046002020 CR. No. I­-329/2020, Satpur Police Station, Nashik registered under sections 395, 394,435,279,337,338, 326,427,143,144,147, 148,149 of the Indian Penal Code and 184,119/177 of the
Motor Vehicle Act.

Order below Exh.1 in Cri. Bail Application No.1684/2020.

{ Ajay Prakash Walke Vs. State }

The bail application is filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( for short ‘ the Cr.P.C.’) by the applicant­ accused Ajay Prakash Walke, arrested on 8.11.2020 in connection with C.R. No. I­329/2020, registered under sections 395, 394, 435, 279, 337, 338, 326, 427, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code and 184, 119/177 of the Motor Vehicle Act ( for short ‘the IPC and MV Act’), filed with Satpur Police Station, Nashik.

He is in magisterial custody remand since 13.11.2020.

2.The application has been preferred on the grounds that the applicant ­accused is falsely implicated in this crime. He is not a habitual offender. He has no criminal antecedents. He is the only earning member of his family. He is ready to abide with any condition imposed by this Court. He was arrested on suspicion.

Nothing is recovered from him. He has not participated in crime. He is unknown with other accused and witnesses. His family is dependent on him. Hence, bail may be granted to them.

3.The learned APP Mrs. Bhide, has filed say at Exh.04.

She has opposed the bail application on the grounds that the offence is serious. The applicant­accused has not given any relevant information while in custody. Activa Motorcycle MH­15­DR 6040 is yet to be recovered. Witnesses would be pressurized. He would commit similar crimes. Test identification parade is yet to be taken.

Hence, bail may not be granted to them.

4.Heard both the sides. Learned APP Mrs. Bhide and learned Advocate Mr.A.S. Mahajan have advanced their respective arguments as per their contentions.

5.Amidst the above rival contentions, it is to be decided as to whether the applicant­accused has made out a genuine case for his enlargement on bail.

6.Briefly stated, as per FIR dated – 07.11.2020, informant Sanket Kasar was proceeding towards Carban Naka. Near Hotel Annapurna he was dashed by a Activa Motorcycle coming from wrong side. He sustained muffle injuries. At that time 7 to 8 persons came there. They asked him to compensate for accident.

Informant Sanket refused as he was not at fault. On this count the persons gathered over there gave beatings to him. The uncle of informant Sanket, Bhagwan Kasar came at the spot in a TATA Sumo Vehicle alongwith his two friends. They were also beaten by the persons gathered over there. They damaged TATA Sumo Vehicle and set on fire the motor­cycle of the informant. The mobile phone of Shrikrushna Kothekar and gold ring of Santosh Nagare was forcibly dispossessed. The informant heard the name of one Pankaj during the incident who was told to fire the motor­cycle.

Accordingly, FIR was registered.

7.On going through the FIR, the name of applicantaccused is not mentioned in it. The FIR is against unknown persons.

No physical description of the persons is given in the FIR. The recovery from the applicant­accused is pertaining to his cloths. The dispossessed muddemal i.e. golden ring and mobile phone is not recovered from him.

8.The objection of prosecution is pertaining to recovery of Activa motor­cycle. The number of Activa Motorcycle is mentioned in the say of Investigating Officer. Its whereabouts can be traced through RTO Office. The applicant­accused is in custody since 8.11.2020. He was in PCR from 8.11.2020 to 13.11.2020. Nothing is revealed from him pertaining to the motor­cycle at his instance.

9.The another objection of prosecution is regarding threat to witnesses. However, no previous criminal record, crime numbers or earlier convictions of the applicant­accused are placed on record.

Therefore, it cannot be ascertained and inferred that the applicantaccused is a habitual offender. No criminal antecedents of the applicant­accused are seen on record. There is nothing in the say of Investigating Officer that the physical custody of the applicantaccused would be helpful for further investigation.

10.Accused no.1 Pankaj Ingale, accused No.3 Vishal Bhutekar and accused no. 4 Akash Thoke are already released on bail. Hence, ground of parity is available to the applicant­accused.

As his role is not distinguishable with the other accused.

11.Thus,in the totality of the circumstances, there are no exceptional grounds raised by the prosecution to deny and reject the bail plea of the accused, when bail is the rule and jail is an exception. There are no circumstances to infer that the applicantaccused would flee from justice. The objections of the prosecution can be taken care of by imposing certain conditions on the applicants­accused. Resultantly, I proceed to pass following order.

O R D E R

1 Application is hereby allowed.

2 Applicant/accused namely Ajay Prakash Walke, be enlarged on bail, in Crime No.I­329/2020 registered with Satpur Police Station, District : Nashik on furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/­ with one or two sureties in like amount.

3 He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as dissuade them for disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

4 He shall not commit similar or any other offence and misuse the liberty granted by this court.

5 He shall attend the court dates scrupulously and co­operate in progress of the trial.

6 He shall attend the concerned police station on every Monday in between 10.00 am to 1.00 pm till competition of the investigation.

7 He shall furnish his address proof, identity proof and mobile number and place of abode and also furnish the address and identity proof along with mobile number of two nearest relatives, residing in District Nashik.

8 If the applicant­accused commit breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail would be cancelled at the moment.

9 Bail before committal court if case is not committed.

(Dictated and Pronounced in open court.) Samarendra Digitally signed by Samarendra Prakashrao Prakashrao Naik Naik Nimbalkar Nimbalkar Date: 2020.12.09 16:11:22 +0530
(S.P. Naik­Nimbalkar ) Additional Sessions Judge, 09.12.2020. Nashik.