Rane

1/4

APL-920-2021(SR.16)

October 29,2021.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 920 OF 2021

Prakash Shivchand Jakhete

.....Applicant

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

.....Respondent

* * * *

Mr. S.V. Marwadi a/w. Ms. Priyanka Pathak, i/by. Mr. S.R.

Mithare, Advocate for the applicant.

Smt. S.V. Sonawane, APP for State.

Coram : Sandeep K. Shinde, J.

Friday, 29

th October, 2021.

P.C. :

1.

Heard.

2.

Applicant is accused in ECA Special Case No.02/2016,

pending in the Court of Special Judge, Greater Bombay. The

offence in this case was registered in the year 1996 under

Sections 3, 7, 8 and 10 of the Essential Commodities Act,

1955. Applicant’s application for discharge was rejected by

the learned Special Judge on 6

th June, 2019. On 6

th July, 2019

Rane

2/4

APL-920-2021(SR.16)

October 29,2021.

applicant and his Advocate were absent. The learned Judge,

therefore issued notice to the sureties and directed non-

bailable warrant against the applicant-accused. It appears,

the applicant successfully evaded execution of warrant. The

learned Judge has noted this fact in his order dated 5^th

December, 2019. Therefore, a proclamation was issued under

Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code. On 1

st February,

2020 after reading the report of proclamation, the learned

Judge has observed that, applicant-accused was evading the

arrest. Therefore, the learned Judge directed warrant of

attachment of properties against accused nos.1 and 2 and

further directed to appoint a Special Police Officer and the

compliance report was called for. Mr. Marwadi, learned

Counsel for the applicant has rightly submitted that, the

learned Judge has not followed the procedure before issuing,

non-bailable warrant or proclamation or warrant attaching

the properties. However, the fact remains that, the

applicant, chose to remain absent and successfully kept

himself away from the process of law, since, after rejection of

his discharge application. It cannot be overlooked that crime

Rane

3/4

APL-920-2021(SR.16)

October 29,2021.

in question was registered in September, 1996 and the trial is

pending since 2016. The learned Judge could not frame the

charge in absence of the applicant-accused. In consideration

of these facts, the applicant is granted liberty to move the

concerned Court seeking cancellation of non-bailable warrant

issued against him. If such an application is moved, the

learned trial Judge shall decide the same in accordance with

law, preferably within four weeks from today.

3.

In the meanwhile, the execution of the non-

bailable warrant issued against the applicant is stayed

subject to cost, Rs.35,000/- (Rs. Thirty Five Thousand only),

which the applicant shall deposit with Tata Memorial

Hospital within three weeks from today.

4.

Mr. Marwadi, learned Counsel for the applicant,

on instructions, undertakes that the applicant shall remain

present and attend the proceedings in the trial Court.

Undertaking is accepted.

5.

In consideration of the facts of the case and

Undertaking, the application is partly allowed in the

aforesaid terms and disposed off.

Rane

4/4

APL-920-2021(SR.16)

October 29,2021.

6.

The trial Court to act on authenticated copy of

this order.

(Sandeep K. Shinde, J.)

NEETA

SHAILESH

SAWANT

Digitally

signed by

NEETA

SHAILESH

SAWANT

Date:

2021.10.30

11:50:44

+0530