ba266,235,232,229,228,,231.odt 1/6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) No.228 OF 2021

(Mukesh s/o. Raju Bawane Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS Durgapur,

District Chandrapur)

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) No.229 OF 2021

(Roshan s/o. Ramchandra Badki and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS

Durgapur, District Chandrapur)

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) No.231 OF 2021

(Dinesh s/o. Krushna Mahakulkar and another Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO,

PS Durgapur, District Chandrapur)

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) No.232 OF 2021

(Prakash s/o. Yeshwant Kamble Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS Durgapur,

District Chandrapur)

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) No.235 OF 2021

(Anjanna Laxmayya Damiri Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS Durgapur,

District Chandrapur)

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) No.266 OF 2021

(Mandip s/o. Prakash Rode Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS Durgapur,

District Chandrapur)

__________________________________________________________________________

Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,

appearances, Court'

s orders of directions

Court'

s or Judge'

s orders.

and Registrar'

s Orders.

Shri A.C. Jaltare, counsel for applicants.

Ms. K.S. Joshi, Public Prosecutor for non-applicant.

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI

,

J

.

DATE : APRIL 20, 2021.

Hearing was conducted through Video

Conferencing and the learned Counsel agreed that the audio and

visual quality was proper.

2.

All these bail applications are arising out of Crime

No.43/2021, registered with Police Station Durgapur, District

Chandrapur for the offences punishable under Sections 143,

147, 149, 448, 427, 395, 324, 325, 504 and 506 of the Indian

Penal Code. Total nine accused have claimed for regular bail in

ba266,235,232,229,228,,231.odt 2/6

terms of Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure code. The

applicants-accused were arrested during the period of last one to

three months in connection with aforesaid crime. After facing

custodial interrogation they are in Magisterial custody. The

investigation is still going on.

3.

Besides usual grounds applicants claimed bail by

contending that, Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code would not

apply since they never intended to commit decoity. Moreover, it

is contended that in order to detain them police have wrongly

invoked Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code by stalling a false

claim regarding forcibly taking away Laptop, iPod of Apple

company total worth Rs.85,000/-. The learned counsel for the

applicants would submit that the applicants and others went to

the place for making peaceful agitation. The police papers

nowhere discloses a specific role of either of the applicants. The

applicants are ready to co-operate with the investigation.

4.

On the other hand, State strongly resisted all bail

applications by filing separate reply-affidavit. The entire story as

narrated in the F.I.R. has been stated in the reply. In resistance it

is contended that the applicants have committed a very serious

offence which attracts severe punishment. They have broken

glasses of 18 vehicles, damaged other property and caused loss

of Rs.30/- lakhs. They have also forcibly taken away laptap and

iPod worth Rs.85,000/-. Still, some of the assailants are

absconding and stolen articles are yet to be recovered. If the

applicants released on bail they may tamper with the

prosecution evidence and also there is likelihood of committing

ba266,235,232,229,228,,231.odt 3/6

offence of similar nature. Lastly, it is contended that the

investigation is still in progress, hence, the applicants are not

entitled for bail.

5.

At the instance of