1
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL COURT
FOR GR.BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO.61 OF 2016
IN
ACB CR NO.52 OF 2016
1.
2.

Kanahiyalal Devji Rathod
Sandeep Ashok More
..Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of ACB, Worli,
Mumbai Vide C.R.No.50/2016)
..Respondent
Ld. advocate Ms. Kadam for the applicants.
Ld. APP Mr.Lade for the State.
CORAM: HIS HONOUR THE SPECIAL JUDGE
SHRI S.V.RANPISE(CR NO.17)
DATE: 17/09/2016
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 regarding Remand
Application No.52 of 2016 registered with A.C.B. Mumbai.
2.

Applicants are arrested in connection with the said
offence registered for the offences punishable u/s. 7,13(1)(d) r/w
13(2) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on 15/09/2016
and now they are in judicial custody and therefore have filed this
2
application on the following grounds:н
GROUNDS
That they have not committed any offence as alleged,
they are permanent residents of Dombivali and Kalyan,
they are falsely implicated in the case, they are public
servants, they have no criminal antecedents, they are
ready and willing to abide by any conditions
imposed by the Court, their families depends upon
them etc.,.
3.

State has filed say and raised objection of conditions.

4.

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 Ms.Kadam for the applicants and
Ld. APP Mr.Lade for the State. Also heard investigating officer Ms.
Ghadge.

3
Point No.1
7.

From the submissions it is gathered that custodial
interrogation is over. Moreover, both the applicants have
challenged the allegations seriously. They are permanent residents
of Dombivali and Thane and has shown their ready and willingness
to abide by any conditions imposed by the Court. Considering the
same and when the allegations are seriously disputed, I hold that it
would be proper to consider the relief as sought for by imposing
stringent conditions.

Hence, I answer point No.1 in the
affirmative and proceed to pass the following order:н
ORDER
1.

Application is allowed.

2.

Each Applicant be enlarged on Bail on executing
P.R.Bond of Rs.15,000/н (Rs.Fifteen thousand only)
with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount
subject to the conditions that
(i).

Applicants should remain present before
the investigating officer at ACB office,
Mumbai on every Wednesday and
Thursday in between 11.00 am and 1.00
pm till filing of the chargesheet.

(ii).

Applicants should not pressurize
the witnesses and tamper with the
evidence.

4
(iii). Applicants should not leave Mumbai
and Thane without prior permission of the
Court.

17/09/2016.

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

”
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 :17/09/2016
Judgment signed on: 17/09/2016
Judgment uploaded on: 26/09/2016
5
Ex.2
Application filed by accused for cash
Security.
Court passed order below Ex.2 :н
ORDER
Perused the application and say filed by A.P.P.
Heard both sides. Considering the difficulty
of obtaining immediate solvency, application is
allowed.
Each applicant is allowed to submit provisionally
cash security of Rs.15,000/н for the period of
four weeks from today.
Registrar(S) is directed to accept the cash
after office hours.

17/09/2016.

S.V.RANPISE
SPECIAL JUDGE.

6
07/06/2016.

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

7
Ex.4
Application filed by adv. Mr.Salunkhe for cash
Security.
Court passed order below Ex.4:н
ORDER
Perused the application.
Say filed by A.P.P.
Heard Adv.Mr.Salunkhe.
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.

06/06/2016.

S.V.RANPISE
SPECIAL JUDGE.

8
”
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
9
”
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 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
10
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.
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.

11
”
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