IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY, BOMBAY.
BAIL APPLICATION NO.270 OF 2019
IN
ACB R.A. NO.335 OF 2019
(CNR NO.: MHCC020049192019)
Shrikant Popatrao Warunde
Aged: 35 years.
]
]
APPLICANT
(ACCUSED)
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra through
the SHO, ACB, Mumbai.
]
]
RESPONDENT
(PROSECUTION)
APPEARANCE:
Mr. Sharad Mulik, Advocate for the Applicant/Accused.
Mr. S.E. Soshthe, APP for the Complainant/State.
APPLICATION FOR BAIL UNDER SECTION 437 OF THE CODE OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CORAM : SHRI S.V. YARLAGADDA
SPECIAL JUDGE UNDER THE
PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT
(Court Room No.54)
DATE :
30th March, 2019.
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
The present applicant was arrested on 26.03.2019 on
allegation
of
receiving
bribe
of
Rs.10,000/
after
demanding
Rs.40,000/. Police invoked Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1988 against him. Today, he has been taken into judicial custody.
He is seeking bail.
2.
The prosecution filed its say and opposed the bail on the
2
ground that the investigation is at primary stage.
The detail
investigation about the role of the applicant and coaccused is to be
done. It is to be verified whether any other public servant is involved in
the offence. The applicant may influence the prosecution’s witnesses or
destroy the prosecution’s evidence.
3.
Upon hearing the learned advocate for the applicant and
the learned special public prosecutor and perusing the case papers, I
find that there is no necessity of custodial detention of the applicant.
Because, he was already in police custody for three days. There is no
report of involvement of any other public servant. In addition to the
same, the applicant submitted and filed his brother’s affidavit stating
that his uncle Subhash Shelke expired on 29.03.2019 and the
applicant’s presence is desired to complete the customary rituals. The
applicant’s brother mentioned in the affidavit that their father Popatrao
is suffering from Cancer and discharged on 29.03.2019 from the
hospital. The grounds cited for opposing the bail are not enough to
reject the bail. In order to address the concerns about influencing the
prosecution’s witnesses and tampering with the evidence, necessary
conditions can be imposed.
Hence, I am inclined to grant the bail.
Accordingly, the following order is passed.
FINAL ORDER
(1) The applicant be released on PR Bond of Rs.25,000/ with one or
two solvent sureties or cash surety of like amount on the following
conditions:
(i)
The applicant shall not directly or indirectly influence the
prosecution witnesses or tamper with its evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall attend the office of ACB, Mumbai and
3
make himself available to the Investigating Officer between
11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. on every Sunday for a period of 2
months or final report, whichever event occurs first.
(iii) The applicant shall regularly attend the Court on the given
dates if the chargesheet is filed and cooperate for expeditious
disposal of the case.
The Investigating Officer to note the conditions.
The application stands disposed off accordingly.
(S.V. YARLAGADDA)
Special Judge
Under the Prevention of Corruption Act,
Greater Bombay.
Date: 30/03/2019.
Order Dictated on :
Transcribed on
:
Signed on
:
30/03/2019
30/03/2019
30/03/2019
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
30/03/2019 at 5.00 p.m.
BHARAT KASHINATH GAIKWAD
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge
HHJ SHRI S.V. YARLAGADDA
(Court Room No.54)
Date of pronouncement of Order
30/03/2019
Order signed by P.O. on
30/03/2019
Order uploaded on
30/03/2019