Guerrero Lugo Elvia Grissel & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra

Mr.Murtaza Najmi a/w Jagdish Shetty for applicants. Mr.P.S.Hingorani, APP for State. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND P.D.KODE, JJ. DATE : 26th August 2011 PC :

#1. By this application the applicants have prayed for bail during pendency of the writ petition in this Court which takes exception to the decision of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai dated 24th May 2011 in CC No.927/PW/

#2. The applicants resorted to plea bargaining. They have been held guilty for the offence punishable under section 380 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and have been ordered to undergo sentence under section 265(E)(d) of Code of Criminal Procedure,

#1973. The correctness of the opinion recorded by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate will be considered in the pending writ petition. From the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate dated 24th May 2 2011, it is noticed that the petitioners have given up their claim on the property in question namely the diamonds and the gold chains. That property has been handed over to the complainant. In addition, the petitioners have compensated the complainant by way of payment of Rs.55.00 lakhs and Rs.5.00 lakhs to the State. It is noticed that the petitioners have already undergone over 12 months of sentence period. In other words, the petitioners have already undergone more than 50% of the sentence period.

#3. It is not possible to take up the writ petition for final hearing immediately on account of confirmation cases listed for hearing from next week. In the circumstances, even though the prayers made in the bail application are resisted by the learned APP, we are inclined to accede to the prayer for bail in the interest of justice by imposing strict conditions. We propose to impose strict conditions in view of the apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioners, if released on bail, may leave the country and may not undergo the remaining period of sentence.

#4. Accordingly, we are inclined to allow the bail application on following conditions :- (a) The applicants shall furnish surety in the sum of Rs.1.00 lakh each with one or two local sureties in the like amount; (b) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of Mumbai and Thane Districts without prior intimation to the Officer In-charge of DCP, CID Unit-12, Dahisar; (c) The passports of the petitioners shall remain in custody of the DCP, CID Unit-12, Dahisar; 3 (d) The petitioners shall report before the Officer In-charge of DCP, CID Unit-12, Dahisar once a week on every Monday between 10.00 to 12.00 a.m; (e) The petitioners shall furnish their place of residence to the Officer In-charge of DCP, CID Unit-12, Dahisar before they are released on bail. In case there is change of residence, prior intimation thereof shall be given to the Officer In-charge, DCP, CID Unit-12, Dahisar as well as to the Registrar of the concerned Magistrate where their surety will be accepted, as condition of bail; (f) Needless to observe that the petitioners will abide by any further direction to be issued by this Court and make themselves available in Court whenever called upon during the pendency of the writ petition. (P.D.KODE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.) 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2109 OF 2011 Guerrero Lugo Elvia Grissel and others Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Murtaza Najmi a/w Jagdish Shetty for petitioners. Mr.P.S.Hingorani, APP for State. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND P.D.KODE, JJ. DATE : 26th August 2011 PC :

#1. Arguable questions are raised. Hence Rule. Mr.Hingorani, APP waives notice for the State. As the petitioners have been ordered to undergo sentence for a period of 21 months only, hearing of the writ petition deserves to be expedited. Accordingly, hearing of the writ petition is expedited. Liberty to apply. (P.D.KODE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)