High Court
Facts
11067 BA.514.2024.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,BENCH AT AURANGABAD.1067 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 514 OF 2024Vishwajeet Ramesh Kasar.… ApplicantVersusThe State of Maharashtra.… Respondent...Mr. Shailendra S. Gangakhedkar, Advocate for Applicant.Mr. Mukesh K. Goyanka, APP for Respondent/State.Mr. Sudheer R. Zambre, Advocate to assist PP....CORAM :SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.DATE :09th May, 2024. P.C.:1Heard. 2This is an application, under Section 439 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.), for grant of regularbail in connection with Crime No.376 of 2023, registered withAhmednagar Taluka Police Station, District Ahmednagar, for theoffences punishable under Sections 302, 384, 386, 387, 323, 504, 506,507, 120-B and 75 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short“the IPC”) and under Section 3(1)(i), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra 21067 BA.514.2024.odtControl of Organized Crime Act (for short “MCOC Act”). 3It is averred in the report that on 30th April, 2023 at about04:30 pm, the informant was in his cloth shop at village Walki, Tahsiland District Ahmednagar. His cousin sister Sakshi made him a phonecall and told him that co-accused Indrajeet Kasar and ShubhamBhalsingh came to the house on motorcycle and they were demandingmoney for running the said shop continuously there to his auntShobha. She asked the informant to come immediately. Theinformant closed that shop and rushed to his house on motorcycle.The father of informant asked those two persons for what money is tobe paid. That time again co-accused, Indrajeet demandedRs.2,70,000/- to the father of the informant. They said if he wants tokeep the shop running he has to pay that amount of Rs.2,70,000/-. Hisfather told to leave that place. Co-accused Indrajeet abused Nathaand again demanded that amount. On his refusal, co-accusedShubham and Indrajeet were enraged and they gave kick and fistblows over the chest of Natha. The informant and his brotherRushikesh tried to rescue Natha, but co-accused Shubham andIndrajeet beat them by fist and kick blows and they went away fromthat place. Natha became unconscious and was taken to the hospital.The informant received threatening phone call from this applicant. Hethreatened the informant as to whether he is willing to continue to run
Legal Reasoning
41067 BA.514.2024.odt7The learned counsel for applicant is relying upon thefollowing authorities:-I)In case of Bhanudas s/o Eknath Kotkar Vs. The State ofMaharashtra, (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.1688 of 2017) ofthis Court dated 15th December, 2017, this Court in paragraphs 3 and 4held as under:-“3Mr Yagnik, learned APP for the State has placed onrecord a copy of the communication dated 13th December,2017 addressed by the Police Sub-Inspector of Koregaon-Park Police Station. Perusal of the said communicationreveals that the applicant is admitted in the hospital from7th December, 2017 and is undergoing treatment.4Taking into consideration that the Applicant isundergoing surgery on account of maxillectomy and furtherthat the Applicant would be required to undergo furthertreatment, we find that the present application deserves tobe allowed on humanitarian ground.”II)In case of Aditya Ashok Marne Vs. State of Maharashtra,[2021] 0 Supreme (Bom) 1529, this Court held that, there is nomaterial showing involvement of applicant in the alleged offence toprima-facie infer it. Thus, without there being material on recordapplicant cannot be kept behind bar. 51067 BA.514.2024.odtIII)In case of Shaikh Azhar @ Chota Shaikh Azhar Vs. The Stateof Maharashtra (Bail Application No.571 of 2023) passed by this Courton 20th April, 2023, this Court held that, no any incriminating articlesare recovered from the applicant. He deserves bail. IV)In case of Anil Suresh Pawar @ Anil Punjabi Vs. The State ofMaharashtra (Bail Application No.803 of 2023) passed by this Courton 12th July, 2023, this Court held that, unless the prosecution hassome material showing the nexus of the applicant with the crime, theapplicant deserves bail. V)In case of Satyendar Kumar Jain Vs. Directorate ofEnforcement, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 686, it is held that, we think itappropriate that the citizen is having a right to take treatment of hischoice, at his own expenses, in a private hospital.VI)In case of Hari Sankaran Vs. Serious Fraud InvestigationOffice and another, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 753, this Court inparagraph 32 held as under:-“32. Dehors merits and demerits as well as thestatutory embargo as contemplated in Section 212(6)(ii) ofthe Act of 2013, powers of this Court under Article 21 ofthe Constitution are unfettered, in the sense, whileexercising constitutional jurisdiction, statutory restrictions, 61067 BA.514.2024.odtper se, do not oust the ability of this Court to grant bail onthe ground of violation of part – III of the Constitution;inarguably, statutory restrictions vis-a-vis constitutionaljurisdiction will have to be harmonized. Having taken intoaccount, the entire facts and circumstances and thematerial on record, I am inclined to grant bail to theapplicant, albeit, by imposing certain conditions.” 8The learned APP for the State strongly opposed theapplication and submitted that the applicant is involved in the seriouscrime and MCOC Act is invoked against him. He fabricated falseevidence for his medical treatment. He pointed out that applicant wasearlier released on bail for medical treatment, however, he misusedthat liberty and committed one more crime i.e. murder punishableunder Section 302 of the IPC. He also committed breach of theconditions of medical bail and did not return to the jail. He wasabsconding for nine months. No any explanation was given as towhere he was for nine months. Thus, if he is released on bail, thencertainly he will abuse the liberty and may commit similar nature ofcrime again. 9The learned APP for the State about the merits of the casesubmitted that the applicant is the mastermind of the murder of Natha.His phone call details show that he made phone calls to the informant,his brother Ravi and the co-accused, who assaulted Natha. His 71067 BA.514.2024.odtinvolvement in this crime shows that he is the wire-puller of this crime.Total 20 crimes are registered against him. The applicant has badcriminal antecedents. It is lastly prayed to reject the application. 10The charge-sheet is not filed on record by the applicant.Perused the written notes of arguments of the applicant, the report andthe phone call details as well as the various medical reports of theMedical Officer of Ahmednagar Jail etc. 11It is not disputed that the applicant is suffering fromserious ailments and now he is under treatment in the Civil Hospital atAhmednagar. The call details shows that this applicant has madephone call to the informant, his brother, co-accused and witnesses.The applicant was released on bail for medical treatment. However,when the applicant was directed to surrender within 15 days by theHonourable Supreme Court, he did not surrender but absconded for along period of 9 months and during that period he committed onemurder. The chart showing crimes registered against the applicant isas under:-Sr.NoPolice StationCrime number with section1Nagar Taluka344/2019 u/s. 143 of Indian Penal Code.2Nagar Taluka388/2019 u/s. 143 of Indian Penal Code. 81067 BA.514.2024.odt3Nagar Taluka419/2019 u/s. 143 of Indian Penal Code.4Nagar Taluka566/2019 u/s. 143 of Indian Penal Code.5Kotwali351/2018 u/s. 406 of Indian Penal Code.6Moujpuri Dist. Jalna151/2018 u/s. 420 of Indian Penal Code.7Moujpuri Dist. Jalna153/2018 u/s. 406 of Indian Penal Code.8Moujpuri Dist. Jalna157/2018 u/s. 420 of Indian Penal Code.9Kotwali293/2016 u/s. 465 of Indian Penal Code.10M.I.D.C.254/2015 u/s. 354(d) of Indian PenalCode.11Kotwali391/2015 u/s. 394 of Indian Penal Code.12Karjat60/2015 u/s. 306 of Indian Penal Code.13Kotwali99/2015 u/s. 420 of Indian Penal Code.14M.I.D.C.104/2014 u/s. 469 of Indian Penal Code.15Parner204/2014 u/s. 420 of Indian Penal Code.16Nagar Taluka92/2021 u/s. 384 of Indian Penal Code.17Nagar Taluka1123/2020 u/s. 302 of IPC withMCOCA18Supa33/2020 u/s. 353 of Indian Penal Code.19Supa39/2020 u/s. 384 of Indian Penal Code.20Nagar Taluka376/2023 u/s. 302 of IPC with MCOCA 12It is not disputed that applicant was absconding for ninemonths. When the applicant was released on bail by the order of this 91067 BA.514.2024.odtCourt for 3 months, during that period, he was not operated. On thecontrary, he committed the serious crime of murder during that period.If all these aspects are considered alongwith the written notes ofarguments of this applicant and oral submissions of both the sides,certainly the applicant is not entitled for bail on the ground of medicaltreatment. There is a possibility of misuse of bail if granted to theapplicant. If his treatment is not possible in the Civil Hospital, the CivilHospital may suggest further mode of treatment to this applicant in J.J. Hospital in Mumbai or any other hospital.13As far as merits are concerned, the applicant is involved inthe serious crime of murder. The name of the applicant is mentionedin the report. The allegation as to interpolation in FIR is a matter ofevidence. The phone call details shows that he made phone call toinformant and witnesses. There is transcript Panchanama dated17.05.2023. The applicant made phone calls to the informant etc.. Hehas sent threatening messages from his mobile phone No.9921859094to the informant and Raviraj son of Natha who was murdered. TheMCOC Act is invoked against him. Thus, in view of Section 21 ofMCOC Act, there is reason to believe that applicant is involved in thiscrime. This offence of murder with demand of extortion for ransom iscommitted. He is involved in twenty crimes. He is convicted in CrimeNo.391 of 2015. He has bad criminal antecedents. Therefore, the 101067 BA.514.2024.odtcase laws cited supra on behalf of the applicant are not helpful to himand therefore, those are not relied upon. Further, in view of theguidelines and the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court inthe cases of Deepak Yadav Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another,(2022) 8 SCC 559, and Shahzad Hasan Khan Vs. Ishtiaq HasanKhan and another, (1987) 2 SCC 684, that applicant if involved inserious crimes and there is possibility of commission of same nature ofcrimes, the bail cannot be granted. Thus, on merits also, the applicantis not entitled for bail. The application deserves to be rejected. Theapplication is rejected. 14Considering the serious nature of this crime and factsituation of the case that the applicant is booked for serious crimeunder the MCOC Act, the learned Special Court is directed to hear thecase as expeditiously as possible and conclude it in any case withinsix months. For that purpose, the Trial Court is expected to keep thedates of hearing atleast twice or thrice in a week. Needless to mentionthat it is a sessions trial and word “sessions” means once it is started itshall not be stopped till it is concluded. 15Inform the Trial Court accordingly.[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] nga
Arguments
31067 BA.514.2024.odthis cloth shop or not and threatened to pay that amount. When thesefacts were disclosed by the informant to his brother Ravi, that timeRavi also told the fact to the informant that the applicant has alsomade phone call to him and threatened to kill him for that aspect.During the treatment, Natha succumbed to the injuries. The reportwas lodged against this applicant and other co-accused.4The bail is prayed on merits and for the medical treatmentof the applicant as well. 5The learned counsel for applicant pointed out a medicalreport of the applicant dated 19th February, 2024 submitted by theChief Medical Officer, Ahmednagar Jail and that the applicant wasoperated for urinary track in the month of October, 2023. 6The learned counsel for applicant submitted that theapplicant is falsely implicated in this crime. There is no reliableevidence against him. The applicant has roots in the society. Theapplicant is suffering from illness of failure of kidney and severediabetes. He was operated for urinary track infection. The CivilSurgeon, Ahmednagar is treating him, however, treatment is notproperly being given to him. It is lastly prayed to allow the applicationon medical ground as well as on merits.