1
Cri BA No.563-2024
MHCC020036352024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.563 OF 2024
Sonu Chandran Diwakaran,
Age: 38 Years, Occ: Labour.

]
] …Applicant.

Versus
The State of Maharashtra
]
(At the instance of V. B. Nagar Police Station Vide ]
F.I.R. No.295 of 2023)
] …Respondent.
Advocate Rajesh Kumar for applicant.
APP Sulbha Joshi for the State.
CORAM :
SHRI. S.B. PAWAR,
THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE (C.R. No.58)
DATE
:
16th MARCH, 2024.
ORDER
The applicant, who is in custody in connection with FIR
No.295 of 2023 (CCTNS No.416 of 2023) registered with V. B. Nagar
Police Station for offence under Sections 398, 452 and 352 of the Indian
Penal Code, has filed the present application for regular bail under
section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short “Cr.P.C.”).
2.

As per the FIR lodged on the basis of statement of first
informant Nirbhay Sumer Singh, on 26.12.2023 the first informant was
sitting in his jewellery shop ‘Bhairavnath Jewellers’, Shop No.2, Almeda
House, Sonapur Lane, Kurla (West), Mumbai. At about 7.10 p.m. one
2
Cri BA No.563-2024
unknown person entered in the shop and suddenly attacked the first
informant. The first informant tried to resist and raised shouts for help.
The said person again tried to assault the first informant with some
weapon in his hand. As first informant raised shouts for help loudly, the
said person threatened the first informant and left the shop. Thereafter,
he went towards Sakinaka on a red colour Activa motorcycle. During
investigation, investigating agency nabbed the applicant as the culprit.
3.

The applicant seeks bail on the grounds that he is falsely
implicated, he is arrested on 01.02.2024 merely on suspicion and the
property is planted upon him. It is further contended that the victim is
out of danger and the offence can not escalate.

The investigation
against the applicant is practically over.
4.

The prosecution opposed bail on the grounds that three
offences are registered against the applicant. He is a habitual offender
and there is possibility that he can threaten the informant and witnesses
and may abscond.
5.

Heard learned Advocate for the applicant, learned APP and
investigating officer. Learned Advocate for the applicant argued that
the offence is regarding attempt to commit robbery. No one is injured
in the alleged offence. As per the FIR, the assailant was wearing black
helmet. Therefore, prosecution can not establish identity of the
assailant. The knife shown to be recovered at the instance of the
applicant is planted as there is no description of such weapon in the
FIR. Registration of other crimes can not be a ground to reject the
application. Thus, he urged to admit the applicant to bail.

3
6.

Cri BA No.563-2024
Learned APP and Investigating Officer resisted the prayer of
bail on the grounds that the applicant was absconding and had fled to
Karnataka after the offence.

CCTV footage is recovered during
investigation in which the applicant is seen with the scooter and the
scooter is recovered. Test Identification Parade is to be conduced and
therefore, they submitted that bail should not be granted to the
applicant.
7.

I have carefully considered submissions of both the sides.

Perused FIR and remand papers annexed with the application.
Admittedly, the FIR was filed against unknown person. The reply filed
by investigating officer indicates that investigating agency has collected
CCTV footage available at the spot of incident and from the said CCTV
footage, the applicant is traced out during investigation, from
Bangalore, Karnataka.

It is further the case of prosecution that the
motorcycle used by the applicant was stolen and CR No.610 of 2023
regarding the same is registered at Ghatkopar Police Station. The said
motorcycle is recovered in the said crime by Ghatkopar Police Station.
One knife is recovered at the instance of the applicant.
8.

At this stage, it appears that there is CCTV footage available
which prima facie shows involvement of the applicant in the offence.
The Test Identification Parade is yet to be conducted. The offence under
section 398 of IPC is a serious offence. Investigation is still incomplete.
The applicant could be arrested from Karnataka after strenuous efforts
by the investigating agency. Therefore, there is possibility that he may
abscond if released on bail. Two other similar crimes are registered
against him indicating possibility of repetition of crime. In all these
circumstances, as investigation is still incomplete, at this stage,
4
Cri BA No.563-2024
applicant can not be admitted to bail and the application is liable to be
rejected. Therefore, I pass following order:
ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No.563 of 2024 filed by the applicant
Sonu Chandran Diwakaran in connection with FIR No.295 of 2023
(CCTNS No.416 of 2023) registered with V. B. Nagar Police Station for
offence under sections 398, 452 and 352 of the Indian Penal Code, is
rejected.
2.

Criminal Bail Application No.563 of 2024 is disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 16/03/2024
Order Dictated on: 16/03/2024
Transcribed on : 16/03/2024
Checked on
: 18/03/2024
Signed on
: 18/03/2024
(S.B. PAWAR)
Additional Sessions Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
22.03.2024
Upload Time
11.45 a.m.

Name of Stenographer
ARUN ANNAMALAI MUDALIYAR
Name of the Judge (With Court SHRI. S.B. PAWAR (CR 58)
Room No.)
THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
of 16.03.2024
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by 18.03.2024
P.O. on
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded 22.03.2024
on