Back
2022 Supreme(Bom) 1265
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Avinash G.Gharote, J.
Amit Premshankar Mishra - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Application (BA) No. 76 of 2022
Decided On : 08-03-2022
S.V.Sirpurkar, Advocate, Amit Chutke, Advocate
The decision emphasizes the importance of substantial evidence and the prohibition of using mere suspicion or disclosure statements as the sole basis for continued incarceration.
Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Law - The court allowed the criminal application and granted bail to the applicant charged under Ss. 394 read with Sec. 34, 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, considering the lack of substantial evidence linking the applicant to the alleged offence and the release of a co-accused on bail.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was arrested for the offence of robbery based on suspicion and the disclosure statements of co-accuseds. The incident involved the robbery of a bag containing money from a bus passenger by individuals posing as police officials.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no substantial evidence linking the applicant to the alleged offence apart from mere suspicion. It also noted that a co-accused, from whom part of the looted amount was seized, had already been released on bail.
Issues: The main issue was the applicant's involvement in the alleged robbery and whether there was sufficient evidence to justify his continued incarceration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of substantial evidence linking the applicant to the alleged offence and the release of a co-accused on bail, leading to the grant of bail to the applicant.
Final Decision: The criminal application was allowed, and the applicant was granted bail on certain conditions.
JUDGMENT
AVINASH G.GHAROTE,J. - Heard Mr. Sirpurkar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Chutke, learned APP for the non-applicant/State.
2. The applicant is arraigned for the offence punishable under Ss. 394 read with Sec. 34, 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The date of incident is alleged to be 30/9/2021. The First Information Report has been lodged on 1/10/2021. The applicant has been arrested on the same day. The charge-sheet has been filed on 9/12/2021.
3. Mr. Sirpurkar, learned counsel for the applicant submits, that the applicant has been arrested mainly on the basis of suspicion, having provided the information of the travel plans of complainant Ishwar Ram Bhera Ram Devashi and his carrying an amount of rupees 50 lakh in a bag, to the other accused, who have robbed the said amount by stopping the bus, some point of time later on, on its way under the pretext, that they were Police officials and taking the complainant out of the bus. It is alleged, that after the said bus had left, the bag containing the amount was snatched away, the complainant was assaulted and the other accused persons had left. The applicant, has been arraigned on the basis of a statement under Sec. 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, by the co-accuseds, as having provided information, which according to him, is inadmissible and cannot be used against the applicant. It is further submitted, that the major portion of money amounting to Rs.45,29,500.00 has been recovered from the other three co-accused, one of whom Tanvirkha Jahagirkha, from whom an amount of Rs.1,99,500.00 has been recovered, has already been released on bail by the learned trial Court on 30/12/2021. He therefore submits, that considering the allegations against the applicant and the prohibition of law, the applicant needs to be released on bail.
4. Mr. Chutke, learned APP for the non-applicant/State, opposes the application and fairly submits, that the applicant has been named by the co-accused in their disclosure statements under Sec. 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, and therefore, this much of the information is impermissible to be used as against the applicant. He also admits, that there is no recovery from the applicant, who was the Manager of Rana Travels, by whose bus the informant/complainant was travelling to Mumbai. He however submits, that looking to the role of the applicant, the application needs to be rejected.
5. The incident is dtd. 30/9/2021 at about 07.00 p.m., in the night, when the complainant who was travelling by the bus of Rana Travels from Akola to Mumbai, was accosted by the other co-accused at Village Ridhora posing themselves as Police officials and detraining the complainant from the bus, and thereafter, robbing him of the bag containing money. The other co-accused have been identified by the informant/complainant, in the Test Identification Parade and substantial amount of money i.e. Rs.45,29,500.00 has been seized from them. It is also undisputed position, that the statements of those co-accused, as against the present applicant, under Sec. 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, cannot be used against the applicant in the matter of implicating him in the present crime and apart from mere suspicion of the involvement of the applicant, there is no other connection to link him to the alleged offence. Moreover, one of the co-accused namely Tanvirkha Jahagirkha from whom part of the amount looted has been seized and has already been released on bail, considering which, I do not see any reason to further continue the incarceration of the applicant. Hence, the following order.
ORDER
i. The Criminal Application is allowed.
ii. Applicant Amit Premshankar Mishra, be released on bail in Crime No. 536/2021 registered at Police Station Balapur, District Akola, for the offence punishable under Ss. 394 read with Sec. 34, 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000.00 (Rs. One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties of the li
