Bail Application No.871/2024.

MHCC020055282024
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE MUMBAI,
AT GR. MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 871 OF 2024.
IN
C.R. NO. 173 OF 2024.

Pradeep Shivsagar Mishra
… Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Wadala T. T. Police Station,
Vide C.R.No. 173/2024).

…Respondent.

Appearances :Ld. Adv. Mr. Manoj R. Gowd for the applicant/accused.
Ld. APP. Mr. Abhijeet Gondwal for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R.NO.37)
DATED : 04TH APRIL, 2024.

Page 1 of 7
Bail Application No.871/2024.
ORAL ORDER
By
this
application
the
applicant/accused
Pradeep
Shivsagar Mishra being accused in C.R.No.173/2024 registered with
Wadala T. T. Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections
307, 326, 324, 323, 504, 506, 427 and read with 34 of Indian Penal
Code, (hereinafter referred to as, “IPC”), seeks bail under Section 439
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short, “CrPC”).
2.

It is stated that, as on 12.03.2024 at about 4.00 p.m. in the
evening the informant alongwith his friend Santosh Yadav consumed
liquor in a Taxi of his friend near Vidyalankar College and slept in the
said Taxi. At that time a Taxi driver acquainted with the informant
namely Zinat came there and assaulted and dashed the informant. At
that time the informant got up and it revealed to him that somebody
was taking out money from his shirt pocket. He further stated that,
the said Zinat told that, the informant’s earlier taxi fair was pending
and therefore either of them had altercations.

At that time
informant’s son came at the spot and the dispute was resolved and
either of them went to their home.
3.

At about 7.30 on the same day an individual residing in the
locality of the informant namely Rakesh Yadav came at the
informant’s place and called the informant’s son. It is alleged that,
Rakesh, Nasim, Zinat were carrying weapons alongwith the
applicant/accused.

Zinat and his colleagues hurled abuses to the
informant’s son.

Further, it is alleged that, Rakesh assaulted
informant’s son and informant’s wife was assaulted by Zinat. The
Page 2 of 7
Bail Application No.871/2024.
ornaments worn by the informant and his wife were also lost in the
said scuffle. Thereafter, all four of them fled from the spot and that
the informant, his son and his wife went at Sion Hospital for
treatment. Thus, offence was registered under Sections ibid.
4.

Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused states that, the
applicant/accused is falsely implicated and is not assigned with any
role in the present crime. It is further Stated that, considering the
role of the co-accused and the applicant/accused charges under
Section 307 and 326 of IPC are not attracted.

Further, the
applicant/accused resides next to the informant being neighbour.
The informant and his family members have been already discharged
on the same day from the Hospital and therefore, at this juncture
further incarceration is not required. Hence, the Ld. Advocate for
applicant/accused prayed for enlarging the applicant/accused on
bail.
5.

Per contra the prosecution has filed their reply vide Exh.2,
and inter alia have resisted the application on various grounds. It is
categorically stated that, the co-accused/wanted accused Nasim is
absconding and if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he might aid the
wanted accused in fleeing.

Further, the prosecution apprehends
abscondance, tampering of evidence and threatening to prosecution
witnesses. It is also stated that, the co-accused are record criminals
and have criminal antecedents to their discredit. Hence, the Ld.
Prosecutor prayed for rejection of application.

Page 3 of 7
Bail Application No.871/2024.

6.

Heard the Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused and Ld.
Prosecutor for the State. Perused application and reply along with the
documents filed and relied by the parties.

7.

The gravamen of indictment against the applicant is that,
the
applicant
had
accompanied
the
co-accused
during
the
commission of crime. On copious perusal of the FIR as well as the
reply filed by the prosecution it palpably evinces to myself that, the
applicant is attributed with the role of hurling abuses alongwith the
co-accused. Three other co-accused have been categorically assigned
with the role of assaulting the informant and his family members and
therefore, at this juncture considering the role of the applicant in
isolation Section 326 alongwith Section 307 of IPC are not attracted
in prima-facie. Furthermore, in this regard, the prosecution also has
not brought any antecedents to the discredit of the applicant/accused
and the antecedents to the discredit of the co-accused cannot be a
ground for denial of bail.
8.

Moreover, while deciding an application for bail it is settled
that the Court is required to see whether the prima-facie case exists
or not. It is not necessary to make roving enquiry or examining the
merits of prosecution case.

9.

Considering the fulcrum of arguments as advanced by the
Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused it is evident that, the factum of
scuffle and altercations are inter-se between the informant and the
said Rakesh and Zinat. The applicant being accompanied with the coPage 4 of 7
Bail Application No.871/2024.
accused cannot be held in connivance with the co-accused unless
tested upon anvil of evidence. Therefore, in my considerate view the
apprehension of the prosecution can be taken care of by saddling
stringent conditions upon the applicant/accused including marking of
his presence before the respondent agency. In the backdrop of the
aforesaid facts, I hold that, the application deserves consideration.
Hence, order infra :–
ORDER
1. Bail Application No.871/2024 is allowed.
2. The applicant/accused Pradeep Shivsagar Mishra
being accused in C.R.No.173/2024 registered with
Wadala T. T. Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 307, 326, 324, 323, 504,
506, 427 and read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, be
released on furnishing P. R. bond of Rs.30,000/(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two
sureties in the like amount.
3. The applicant/accused and his sureties shall provide
their respective residential addresses, mobile
numbers and email addresses, if any.
The
applicant/accused shall intimate any such change in
address or telephone number and Email ID
forthwith.
4. The applicant/accused shall not directly or
indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise
to any person acquainted with the facts of the
present case to dissuade them from disclosing such
facts to the Court.
5. The applicant/accused shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence in any manner.
6. The applicant/accused shall attend the Wadala T. T.
Police Station on every Tuesday and Friday between
11.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. until further order.
7. The applicant/accused shall surrender his passport
if any with the investigating officer. If the applicant
Page 5 of 7
Bail Application No.871/2024.
doesn’t have passport, he will furnish an affidavit to
that effect.
8. The applicant/accused shall not leave India without
permission of this Court.
9. Any breach of the conditions in this bail order shall
entail cancellation of bail forthwith.
10.
Bail
Application
disposed of accordingly.

No.871/2024
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
JOGLEKAR
Date : 04.04.2024.

stands
Digitally signed by
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH JOGLEKAR
Date: 2024.04.04
17:45:37 +0530
(Dr. A. A. JOGLEKAR)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (C.R.No.37)
Dictated on
: 04.04.2024.
Transcribed on : 04.04.2024.
HHJ signed on : 04.04.2024.

Page 6 of 7
Bail Application No.871/2024.

“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
04.04.2024
05.45 p.m.

Mahendrasing D. Patil
Stenographer (Grade-I)
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGMENT/ORDER
HHJ Dr. A. A. JOGLEKAR
(Court Room No. 37)
of
04.04.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
04.04.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on
04.04.2024
Page 7 of 7