BA 8-2016
1
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR
GR.BOMBAY AT BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO.08 OF 2016
IN
REMAND APPLICATION NO.07 OF 2016
IN
ACB, GMU MUMBAI CR NO.07/2016
Sandeep Rajput
Age 42 years, Indian Inhabitant,
adult, of Mumbai residing at
15B, New MHADA colony,
Dindoshi,Mumbaiн65
..Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra
(thru STATE ACB)
..Respondent
Ld. advocate Mr.Girish Kulkarni for the applicant
Ld. APP Mr.Lade for the State.
CORAM: HIS HONOUR THE SPECIAL JUDGE
SHRI S.V.RANPISE(CR NO.17)
DATE: 22/02/2016
Application for bail
ORAL ORDER
1.

Present application is filed by the applicant u/s. 439 of
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for bail in CR No.07 of 2016
filed in Remand Application No.7 of 2016 registered with A.C.B.
Mumbai for the offences punishable u/s. 7,13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of
The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and u/s. 109 of Indian
BA 8-2016
2
Penal Code registered against this applicant and other accused.
2.

Applicant has filed this application on the ground that
he was arrested in connection with the said offences on
05/02/2016 and since then he is in custody.

Now custodial
interrogation is over and therefore he has filed this application on
the following grounds:н
GROUNDS
That he has not committed any offence, he is
permanent resident of Mumbai, he has no criminal
antecedents, he has been falsely involved in the said
case, he has his family to look after, he has already
helped the investigating machinery and he is ready and
willing to abide by any conditions imposed by the
Court etc.,.
3.

State has filed say and raised objection on the ground
that if the application is granted, then it would cause hurdle in
investigation.

Moreover, further investigation is required to be
carried out with the accused about R.T.I. volunteers whose names
are appearing during the course of investigation. Moreover, if the
applicant is granted bail, he is likely to tamper with the evidence
and pressurize the witnesses and also likely to dispose off
his
disproportionate assets and therefore State has prayed for rejection
of this application.

BA 8-2016
4.

3
Following points arise for my determination.
POINTS
5.

1.

Is applicant entitled for bail as sought for?

2.

What order?

My findings thereon with reasons thereto are as
follows:н
FINDINGS
1.

In the affirmative.

2.

As per final order.

REASONS
6.

Heard Ld. Advocate Mr.Girish Kulkarni for the
applicant, Ld. APP Mr.Lade for the State and investigating officer
Mr.Rajendra Ahire.
Point No.1
7.

Though State has raised objection in writing, but,
during the course of oral submissions, the investigating officer has
frankly submitted to impose attendance. Moreover, it is important
to note that offences levelled against the applicant/accused are not
punishable either with death or imprisonment for life.

The
applicant is permanent resident of Mumbai and his submissions
shows that he has helped the investigating machinery. Moreover,
he has also shown his ready and willingness to help the
investigating officer in further investigation. Though grievance is
BA 8-2016
4
raised by the State on the ground that there is possibility of
tampering of the evidence, but, I hold that it can be taken care by
imposing certain conditions. Considering the same and when
involvement of the applicant is seriously disputed and considering
the role of the applicant, I hold it proper to allow this application
by imposing certain conditions. Accordingly, I answer point No.1
in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following order:н
ORDER
1.

Application is allowed.

2.

Applicant be enlarged on Bail on
executing P.R.Bond of Rs.25,000/н
(Rs.twenty five thousand only) with one
or more solvent surety/sureties in the like
amount, subject to the conditions that
Applicant should not leave Mumbai
without prior permission of this
Court, should not pressurize the
witnesses, & tamper with the evidence and
should attend concerned A.C.B. Office on
every Tuesday and Thursday in
between 11.00 am to 1.00 p.m. till filing
of the chargeнsheet.

22/02/2016.

S.V.RANPISE
SPECIAL JUDGE,
UNDER P.C.ACT
MUMBAI.

BA 8-2016
Ex.2
5
Application filed by adv. Mr.Kulkarni for cash
Security.
Court passed order below Ex.2:н
ORDER
Perused the application.
Say filed by A.P.P.
Heard Adv.Mr.Kulkarni
Application is allowed.
Applicant is allowed to submit provisionally
cash security of Rs.25,000/н for the period of
four weeks.
Registrar(S) is directed to accept the cash
after office hours.

22/02/2016.

S.V.RANPISE
SPECIAL JUDGE.

”
I affirm that the contents of this PDF file judgment are the
same, word to word, as per the original judgment.”
Mrs.T.C.Kamble(HG Stenographer)
HHJ Shri S.V.RANPISE (CR 17)
Date of pronouncement of judgment :22/2/16
Judgment signed on: 22/2/16
Judgment uploaded on: 10/3/16
BA 8-2016
6
”
I affirm that the contents of this PDF file judgment are the
same, word to word, as per the original judgment.”
Mrs.T.C.Kamble(HG Stenographer)
HHJ Shri S.V.RANPISE (CR 17)
Date of pronouncement of judgment :5/2/16
Judgment signed on: 5/2/16
Judgment uploaded on: 9/2/16
BA 8-2016
7
BA 76/2015
Ld. Advocate Mrs.Barge for the applicants
Ld. Advocate Mr.Lade for the State
F.R.S.R. the following order is passed:ORDER
1.

Application is allowed.

2.

Applicant be enlarged on Bail on executing
P.R.Bond of Rs.15,000/н with one solvent surety
in the like amount, subject to the conditions that
Applicant should attend concerned A.C.B. Office
on every Thursday in between 10.00 a.m. to
12.00 noon and should not leave Mumbai
and Navi Mumbai without prior permission of
Court till filing of the chargeнsheet and should
not pressurize the witnesses and tamper with the
evidence.

Ex.2
Application filed by adv. Mrs.Barge for cash
Security.

BA 8-2016
8
Court passed order below Ex.2:н
ORDER
Perused the application. Heard Adv.Mrs.Barge
Say filed by A.P.P.
Application is allowed.
Applicant is allowed to submit provisionally
cash security of Rs.15,000/н for the period of
four weeks.
Registrar(S) is directed to accept the cash
after office hours.
Spl. Judge
10/12/2015.
”
SPL.JUDGE.
I affirm that the contents of this PDF file
judgment are the same, word to word, as per the original
judgment.”
Mrs.T.C.Kamble(HG Stenographer)
HHJ Shri S.V.RANPISE (CR 17)
Date of pronouncement of judgment :
Judgment signed on: 10/12/15
Judgment uploaded on: 10/12/15
10/12/15