ABA-2400-2021-ABA-2409-2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2400 OF 2021

GULAB UTTAM MANE

)...APPLICANT

V/s.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

)...RESPONDENT

WITH

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2409 OF 2021

VINOD SHIVAJI MANE

)...APPLICANT

V/s.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

)...RESPONDENT

Mr.Shekhar Ingawale, Advocate for the Applicant in ABA

No.2400 of 2021.

Dr.Yug Mohit Choudhari i/b. Mr.Priyal G. Sarda, Advocate for the

Applicant in ABA No.2409 of 2021.

Smt. P. P. Shinde, APP for the Respondent – State.

Mr.Ranjeet Patil, Advocate for the Intervenor.

CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J.

RESERVED ON : 17^th DECEMBER 2021

PRONOUNCED ON : 20^th DECEMBER 2021

AVK 1/8

ABA-2400-2021-ABA-2409-2021.doc

P.C. :

1

The present applications have been moved by the

applicants under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

apprehending arrest under Section 386, 387, 302, 120B read

with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) registered vide Crime

No.779 of 2018 with Police Station Baramati City, Pune.

2

Informant is the wife of Krushna @ Nana Mahadev

Jadhav (deceased). The prosecution case is that the applicants

along with other accused used to harass the deceased and

demand extortion amount in the sum of Rs.30 lacs which

deceased had refused to part with. Keeping this grudge in mind,

it is alleged that on 5^th November 2018, the applicants along with

other accused assaulted the deceased by means of a sharp

weapon and caused his death. Informant accordingly lodged

First Information Report (FIR).

AVK 2/8

ABA-2400-2021-ABA-2409-2021.doc

3

Mr.Shekhar Ingawale, learned counsel for the

applicant in ABA No.2400 of 2021 submits that there is no

sanction under the provisions of Maharashtra Control of

Organized Crimes Act (MCOC Act) against the applicant. Infact,

the material on record would suggest that it were juveniles who

committed the murder of the deceased. The learned counsel also

invited my attention to the confessional statement of co-accused

Kundan @ Bala Dattatray Jadhav and pointed out that even his

statement does not reveal the participation of the applicant in the

crime. Rather, his statement reveals name of assailants who

actually participated. Moreover, he also has been enlarged on

bail. In such circumstances, the present applicant is also entitled

to be given the benefit of pre-arrest bail.

4

Dr.Yug Mohit Choudhari, learned counsel for the

Applicant in ABA No.2409 of 2021, submits that there is no

sanction against the applicant about the applicability of

provisions of MCOC Act. The only allegation against the

applicant is that he was one of the conspirators. According to the

AVK 3/8

ABA-2400-2021-ABA-2409-2021.doc

learned counsel although the learned APP has given the

antecedents in the Affidavit-in-Reply, namely, involvement of the

applicant in Baramati City Police Station C.R.No.275 of 2011

under Section 302 of the IPC, but the applicant has already been

acquitted in the said crime which is apparent from their own

documents at page no.609. Investigation is over. Having regard

to the nature of accusation, the applicant deserves to be

protected by granting pre-arrest bail, argued learned counsel.

5

Smt.P.P.Shinde, learned APP, assisted by Mr.Ranjit

Patil, learned counsel for the intervenor, submits that applicants

were absconding since beginning and then invited my attention

to statement of prosecution witnesses, namely, Sikander

Fakruddin Shaikh and Vikrant Krushna Jadhav to prove the angle

of conspiracy. There being no merit in the applications, the same

are liable to be rejected, argued the learned APP.