Criminal Application (Appp) No.521/2018

1. This is an application for grant of permission to assist the prosecution. The said application is by Smt. Geeta Yadav who is one of witnesses in the crime.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. For the reasons stated therein, the application is allowed.

4. Learned counsel Shri R.R. Vyas is permitted to assist the prosecution.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.193/2018

1. This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.

2. Heard learned senior counsel Shri S.P. Dharmadhikari for the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri N.S. Rao for the State, and learned counsel Shri R.R. Vyas to assist the prosecution.

3. This application is a second attempt on the part of the applicant to obtain discretionary relief from this Court in the nature of prearrest bail in connection with Crime No.226/2017 registered with Police Station Dhantoli, Nagpur.

Earlier application filed on behalf of the applicant was registered as Criminal Application (ABA) No.889/2017. At the time of filing of the said application, the investigation was in progress. After hearing learned senior counsel, who was appearing at that time and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, when this Court expressed its opinion that the Court is not inclined to grant relief of prearrest bail, upon instructions from the applicant, the said application was withdrawn.

4. It appears that subsequently the investigating officer completed his investigation and filed final report before the Court of law.

5. After submission of the final report, the applicant renewed his request for relief under Section 438 before learned Sessions Judge. However, his plea was not found favour with learned Judge of the Court below. Therefore, the present application is filed.

6. Learned senior counsel Shri S.P. Dharmadhikari for the applicant submitted that much water has flown below the bridge. He submitted that though initially Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was applied in Crime No.226/2017, at the time of filing of the chargesheet before the Court, the investigator has deleted the said provision and has filed chargesheet under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. He submitted that for good or bad reasons, the applicant, till today, is not apprehended by the investigating machinery. He submitted that the applicant is a politician and a Chairman of the Maharashtra Labour Welfare Board. He submitted that there is a counter case also in which the first informant in Crime No.226/2017 is one of the accused. Therefore, it is his submission that relax standard should be applied for considering the present application. He submitted that the applicant is having deep roots in the society and there is no reason that he will not be available to the course of justice. It is his submission that for the purposes of collecting blood samples of the applicant, the applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency. He also submitted that strict conditions can be imposed upon the applicant that he shall not enter the territorial jurisdiction of the Nagpur city. He submitted that since entire chargesheet is filed, custodial presence of the applicant is not necessary. He submitted that the application, therefore, be allowed.

7. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri N.S. Rao for the State vehemently opposed the application for pre-arrest bail. He submitted that from the date of recording of the First Information Report (FIR) against the applicant, he and his brother Bala are absconding. He submitted that though the weapon is already recovered from other co-accused, custodial presence of the applicant is necessary since the investigator wants to conduct in depth investigation in the matter. He submitted that looking to the position of the applicant in the society, there is a possibility that the applicant may tamper and/or influence the prosecution witnesses. He, therefore, submitted th