IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
M.S. Karnik, J.
Rajesh Kerkar - Appellant
Versus
State of Goa - Respondent
Criminal Application Bail No. 421 of 2023-F
Decided On : 03-07-2023
BAIL - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - The court granted bail to the applicant despite his criminal history, emphasizing that mere antecedents do not justify denial of bail. The court imposed stringent conditions to mitigate risks associated with the applicant's release, reflecting a balanced approach to the presumption of innocence and the seriousness of the charges.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought bail for charges under IPC sections related to rioting and attempted murder, following an incident where he was alleged to have participated in the stabbing of Ravi Shirodkar. The applicant has a history of criminal cases against him, including serious offenses.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that while the applicant was present during the assault, he did not have any overt act attributed to him. The applicant had been in custody since the incident, and the trial was expected to take a long time. The court found that previous criminal cases alone were insufficient to deny bail.
Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail despite his criminal history and the serious nature of the charges against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that a history of criminal offenses does not automatically disqualify an applicant from receiving bail, especially when no direct involvement in the current offense is proven. The imposition of stringent conditions can address concerns regarding the applicant's release.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the applicant with specific conditions aimed at ensuring compliance and preventing interference with the trial process.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. Heard Mr. V. Amonkar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. N. Vaze, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
2. This is an application for bail for the offence under punishable under Sec. 143, 147, 148, 307 r/w 149 of IPC and Sec. 25 of the Arms Act registered with Anjuna Police Station vide FIR No. 161/2022 dtd. 1/10/2022. It is alleged that the applicant with 15 other accused is responsible for stabbing Ravi Shirodkar. The applicant and the other accused are alleged to have abused Ravi Shirodkar. Mr. N. Vaze, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application mainly on the ground that the applicant was present when the assault took place. According to learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, the applicant was actively involved along with the main assailant. It is next submitted by Mr Vaze, that the applicant is a history sheeter, for as many as 12 cases are registered against him including the present one.
3. A perusal of the FIR reveals that the main assailant is one Mr. Tarzan Parsekar. Ravi Shirodkar was assaulted by Tarzan Parsekar and Sagar Xetrapal Patil. There is no overt act attributed to the accused. The applicant is in custody since 1/10/2022. The trial is likely to take a long time to conclude. Though there are criminal cases pending against the applicant, the offences are in the nature of Sec. 323, 143, 147, 504 of the IPC. In respect of a previous offence registered against the applicant under Sec. 307 of IPC, the applicant has been acquitted. According to me, criminal antecedents by itself would not be a sufficient ground to reject the bail to the applicant as I propose to impose stringent conditions. Hence I pass the following order:-
<WXY>O R D E R
i. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail upon his furnishing a PR bond in the sum of Rs.25, 000.00 with one or more surety/sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
ii. The applicant shall not enter North Goa District during the pendency of the trial except for attending the trial and Investigating officer. iii The applicant shall furnish residential address where he will presently stay and all contact details along with his mobile number to the Trial Court as well as the Investigating Officer. The applicant shall inform about any change in residential address or contact details to the trial Court as well as the Investigating Officer.
iv. The applicant shall not leave the State of Goa without prior permission of the trial Court.
v. The applicant shall report to the Anjuna Police Station once in 15 days on alternate Thursday of the month commencing from the first Thursday of August 2023 between 11.00am to 12.00 noon till the trial is concluded.
vi.The applicant shall not indulge in any activity that would amount to tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses.
vii. The applicant shall attend the hearing regularly on the dates fixed by the trial Court.</WXY>
4. Application for bail stands disposed of accordingly.
The presumption of innocence and the right to bail are fundamental principles in criminal law, which can only be overridden by compelling reasons, such as the risk of flight or tampering with evidenc....
The court established that prolonged detention without trial, alongside the nature of the injuries and the status of co-accused, can justify the granting of bail, reinforcing the presumption of innoc....
Prolonged pre-trial detention without prior criminal history can be a significant factor in granting bail, provided that conditions are imposed to safeguard the integrity of the trial.
The main legal point established is that the addition of Section 120(B) of the IPC does not automatically imply the applicant's involvement as a conspirator, and bail decisions should consider the in....
The court may grant bail based on the lack of specific mention of the applicant's involvement in the complaint and supplementary statement, and the existence of bail for other accused, despite the se....
The court may grant bail to an accused considering the length of time in custody and the progress of the case.
Bail should ensure the accused's attendance at trial, not serve as punitive action, highlighting the principle of presumption of innocence.
The principle of parity in bail applications allows for similar treatment of accused individuals in comparable circumstances, provided that appropriate safeguards are in place to protect the integrit....
The court denied bail due to the serious nature of the charges and the risk of evidence tampering, emphasizing the need to balance individual liberty with justice.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.