(Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.)
Pawandeepsingh Mahendrasingh Kohli _________________ Appellant;
v.
State of Maharashtra ______________________________ Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 513 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3831 of 2021) (Diary No. 25332 of 2020), decided on May 18, 2021
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. At the outset, we posed a question to the learned counsel for the State with reference to the averments made in paragrah 8 of the counter affidavit as regards the conduct of the appellant in custody, which have been countered by the appellant by way of rejoinder affidavit.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State, Mr. Rahul Chitnis, in all fairness, submits that as regards such averments, he has not placed any documentary evidence on record.
6. Leaving this aspect aside, we have taken note of the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant that he is in custody since 16.02.2016 and the allegations against him cannot be said to be standing on a higher pedestal than the allegations against various other co-accused persons, including the co-accused Santosh Shankar Ingle, who was granted bail by this Court by order dated 05.11.2020 in SLP(Crl.) No. 4713 of 2020; and also the other accused (Haridas Vitthal Dalvi) in a co-related matter, who was granted bail by this Court by the order dated 25.03.2021 in SLP(Crl.) No. 6355 of 2020 with reference to the aforesaid order dated 05.11.2020 concerning the co-accused (Santosh Shankar Ingle).
7. It is also pointed out that so far the trial is concerned, the same has not proceeded further and even the charges are yet to be framed.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent-State though has opposed the prayer for grant of bail as made on behalf of the appellant but could not dispute the basic fact concerning the co-accused persons, as also the status of the trial, as noticed above.
9. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find it just and proper that the appellant be released on bail, now at this stage as no useful purpose will be served with his further detention in the matter.
10. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed; the impugned order dated 29.03.2019 is set aside; and the appellant is ordered to be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court.
11. In keeping with the orders passed in relation to the co-accused persons, it is also provided that apart from other conditions, the Trial Court shall also ensure that the appellant shall surrender his passport, if any, and further that he shall not contact or, in any manner, influence the witnesses of the case.
12. It is also made clear that if it is found at any stage that the appellant is misusing the liberty of bail, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.
13. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s). 25332/2020
Pawandeepsingh Mahendrasingh Kohli ___________________ Petitioner
v.
The State of Maharashtra ____________________________ Respondent
IA No. 123973/2020 – CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
IA No. 123974/2020 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 31577/2021 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 123975/2020 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 55376/2021 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 123977/2020 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 18-05-2021 This matter was called on for hearing today.
(Before Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. K. Parameshwar, Adv.
Mr. Anand Dilip Landge, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv.
Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR
Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv.
Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
14. Delay condoned.
15. Leave granted.
16. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
17. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
———
