Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 506 (BOM)

Arun Kumar v. Police Inspector, Colva

2022-02-23

MANISH PITALE

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. These two applicants before this Court are seeking bail in connection with FIR No.77 of 2021 dtd. 16/10/2021, registered at the Colva Police Station, South Goa for offences under Sec. 370 of the IPC and Ss. 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. 2. It is an admitted position that there are three accused persons in this case and accused no.2 was granted bail by this Court on 9/2/2022. 3. Although these applications are listed for the first time before this Court, since an advanced copy was served on the office of learned Advocate General, the learned Public Prosecutor has appeared in these cases and say has been filed in these applications. 4. Mr. R. Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the applicants has placed reliance on the order dtd. 9/2/2022 passed by this Court granting bail to accused no.2(Criminal Misc. Application (Bail) No.43 of 2022-F- Satwat Singh Vs The Police Inspector Officer Incharge of Colva Police Station and anr.). The learned Counsel seeks parity and submits that the applicants undertake to abide by the conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail. It is further submitted that the aforesaid order of this Court was brought to the notice of the Sessions Court while seeking bail for the applicants, but the Sessions Court chose to reject the bail applications. 5. Mr. S. G. Bhobe, learned Public Prosecutor, submitted that accused no. 2, in this case, was indeed granted bail by order dtd. 9/2/2022. It was submitted that the aspect of parity was also argued before the Sessions Court. In fact, it was brought to the notice of the Sessions Court that the accused no. 2 was released on bail by this Court and the same was noted in the orders passed by the Sessions Court in the case of applicants herein. 6. Considering the fact that the role attributed to the applicants before this Court is not materially different from the role that was attributed to the accused no.2, who has been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dtd. 9/2/2022, this Court is of the opinion that present applications can be allowed by imposing appropriate conditions. 7. 6. Considering the fact that the role attributed to the applicants before this Court is not materially different from the role that was attributed to the accused no.2, who has been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dtd. 9/2/2022, this Court is of the opinion that present applications can be allowed by imposing appropriate conditions. 7. It is a matter of record that although the offences registered against the applicants are serious in nature, it is found that in the list of witnesses, none of the victim girls have been shown as witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution. The investigation is admittedly complete and the chargesheet was filed on 16/11/2021. It was also stated that the applicants do not have a criminal antecedents. Therefore, these applications deserve to be allowed. 8. In view of the above, the applications are allowed in the following terms: (a) The applicants shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000.00 each with one cash surety each in the like amount to be deposited before the Trial Court, in connection with FIR No.77/2021 dtd. 16/10/2021, registered at Colva Police Station. (b) The applicants shall attend the proceedings before the Trial Court on each and every date. (c) The applicants shall place on the record of the Trial Court their contact numbers including their mobile numbers and their addresses where they would be residing. (d) The applicants shall keep the Trial Court informed of any change of the address or contact number during the pendency of the trial. (e) The applicants shall place on the record of the Trial Court the details of the Police Stations within the jurisdiction of which they shall be residing at their native places. (f ) The applicants shall not themselves or through any other person act in any manner that would amount to tampering with the evidence or influencing witnesses. (g) Needless to say, that violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall make the applicants liable for cancellation of bail. (h) It is made clear that the Trial Court shall proceed with the matter, uninfluenced by the observations made in the present order.