Vernon vs State of Maharashtra - 2023 Supreme(SC) 662

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 662

ANIRUDDHA BOSE, SUDHANSHU DHULIA
Vernon – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Rebecca John, Sr. Adv., Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv., Mr. Jawahar Raja, Adv., Chinmay Kanojia, Adv., Mr. Archit Krishna, Adv., Mr. N. Sai Vinod, AOR, Mr. Vishnu P, Adv., Ms. Varsha Sharma, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Anand Dilip Landge, Adv., Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv., Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR, Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv., Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv., Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv., Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. K M Nataraj, A.S.G., Mr. Sharath Nambiar, Adv., Mr. Nakul Chnegappa K.K., Adv., Mr. Vatsal Joshi, Adv., Ms. Indra Bhakar, Adv., Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv., Mr. Anuj Srinivas Udupa, Adv., Mr. Chitransh Sharma, Adv., Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv., Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Adv., Ms. Deepabali Dutta, Adv., Ms. Sairica S Raju, Adv., Mr. Sabarish Subramanyam, Adv., Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR

JUDGMENT :

ANIRUDDHA BOSE, J.

The appellants before us assail two judgments of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay rejecting, in substance, their prayers for bail. Both the applications were filed on 27th October 2018 after the Special Judge, Pune under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (“1967 Act”) had dismissed their bail plea. The decisions of the High Court were delivered on the same date i.e. 15th October 2019.

2. We shall deal with both the appeals in this judgment as the detention of the appellants was on the basis of the same First Information Report (“FIR”) and the chargesheet also contains the same Sections in respect of which offences are alleged to have been committed by them. These are Sections 121, 121A, 124A, 153A, 505(1)(b), 117, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“1860 Code”) and Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18B, 20, 38, 39 and 40 of the 1967 Act. Wherever there are distinguishing features vis-à-vis the individual appellants in relation to the nature of evidence against them relied on by the Investigating Agency, we shall refer to them separately. In the subject-case, initially investigation was conducted by the regular law enforceme

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(SC) 662

ANIRUDDHA BOSE, SUDHANSHU DHULIAVernon – AppellantVersusState of Maharashtra – Respondent

Cases Referred (13)

ANIRUDDHA BOSE, SUDHANSHU DHULIA
Vernon – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent