(Kurian Joseph and R. Banumathi, JJ.)
Vinod @ Sai D. Ghogale ______________________________ Appellant
v.
The State of Maharashtra ____________________________ Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1724 of 2017 [@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 6660 of 2017], decided on October 3, 2017
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by
Kurian, J.:—
1. Leave granted.
2. It is informed that out of ten years of sentence, the appellant has served more than seven years in jail. It is also informed that the co-accused has been released on bail.
3. While issuing notice on 28.08.2017, this Court passed the following order:—
“Delay condoned.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Accused No. 2, who is exactly similarly placed as the petitioner, has been granted bail, whereas the petitioner has been denied bail.
In view of the above submission, issue notice, returnable in four weeks.”
4. The learned counsel for the State submits that the High Court is taking steps to expedite the hearing, but the fact remains is that, the appellant is similarly placed as the co-accused.
5. Having already served more than seven years, out of ten years of sentence, we are of the view that the appellant also needs to be enlarged on bail, if not required to be detained in any other case.
6. Therefore, the appellant is enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the tune of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
7. In view of the above, this appeal is disposed of.
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 6660/2017
Vinod @ Sai D. Ghogale ______________________________ Petitioner
v.
The State of Maharashtra ____________________________ Respondent
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No. 75334/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP and IA No. 75335/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No. 75336/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS)
Date: 03-10-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today.
(Before Kurian Joseph and R. Banumathi, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sushil Karanjkar, Adv.
Mr. K.N. Rai, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
Order
8. Leave granted.
9. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed non-reportable Judgment.
10. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
———
