19aba204-22.odt

1/5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.204 OF 2022

MULCHAND S/O NAMOMAL SETIYA

VS

STATE OF MAH. THR. PSO PS JARIPATKA NAGPUR

_______________________________________________________________

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

appearances, Court's orders of directions

Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Shri M.P. Naidu, Advocate for applicant

Shri S.D. Sirpurkar, APP for the State / Non-applicant

Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Assist to prosecution

CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J

.

DATE

D : 18^th April, 2022.

1.

This is an application for grant of pre-arrest bail in Crime

No.643 of 2021 dated 09.10.2021, registered with Police Station

Jaripatka, District : Nagpur City, for the offences punishable under

Sections 306, 384, 387, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code.

2.

Shri Naidu, learned counsel for the applicant submits that

after rejection of the first application for grant of pre-arrest bail, the

police have filed charge-sheet and in view of the change in

circumstance, the second application for pre-arrest bail is

maintainable.

3.

He further submits that the main accused was released on

regular bail by the learned Sessions Court vide order dated

23.02.2022 on Exh.3. He has drawn attention to the findings

19aba204-22.odt

2/5

recorded by the learned Sessions judge in paragraph No.4 of the

above referred order.

4.

Shri Naidu, learned counsel for the applicant has placed

reliance on the numerous judgments on the point that second bail

application is maintainable as well as on merit of the matter, which

are as follows:

i)

Rani Dudeja Vs. State of Haryana (Supreme Court of

India in Special Leave Petition (Cri) No.2406 of 2017, decided on

30.03.2017

ii)

Umakant Shyampal Agnihotri Vs. State of Maharashtra¹

iii)

Yogesh s/o Prabhakar Marathe Vs. State of Maharashtra²

iv)

Manohar Laxman Gavandha Vs. State of Maharashtra³

v)

Joseph Paul Vs. Shelly Dhall w/o Sanjesh⁴

vi)

Aneesh Vs. State of Kerala⁵

vii)

Shabbir Hussain Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh &

Ors.⁶

viii)

Balaji Vs. State of Maharashtra and other (Bombay High

Court, Aurangabad Bench in Criminal Application No.3959 of

2019, dated 05.08.2021).

5.

On the other hand, Shri Sirpurkar, learned APP strongly

opposes the application and submits that the charge-sheet has been

filed against the accused No.1. Whereas, no charge-sheet has been

1

2004 ALL MR(Cri) 2681

2

2020(3) AIR Bom.R (Cri) 115

3

2012(4) CCR 230

4

2008 ALL MR(Cri) 1010

5

2014 CriLJ 1853

6

2021(3) Ker L.J. 892

19aba204-22.odt

3/5

filed against the present applicant and therefore, there is no change

in circumstance as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

6.

He further submits that once this Court has considered

the dying declaration as well as the statements recorded by the

Investigating Officer during investigation and rejected the first

application for pre-arrest bail and in absence of any change in

circumstance, the second application cannot be considered.

7.

He therefore, submits that after rejection of the first pre-

arrest bail application, this Court can not go into the merit of the

matter, unless the change in circumstance is pointed out.

8.

Shri Bhandarkar, learned counsel, who is assisting the

prosecution reiterated the submission of the learned APP and prays

for rejection of the application.

9.

I have perused the charge-sheet filed against the accused

No.1 as well as the order, rejecting the first pre-arrest bail application

of the applicant by this Court vide order dated 02.12.2021 and the

contents of the FIR.

10.

This Court, while rejecting the application of the

applicant for grant of pre-arrest bail vide order date