1
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GR. BOMBAY AT BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION 94 OF 2014
IN
REMAND APPLICATION 74 OF 2014
MR.VISHAL NANDKUMAR SANAP, Age 29 yrs
Occ: Service(Police Sipai), Residing at
Tulsi Height R.No.1303
Sector 10/E Kalamboli,
Road Pali, Post Navade,
Tal Panvel, Dist Raigad
..Applicant
V/S
The State of Maharashtra
Through Anti Corruption Bureau
..Respondent
CORAM : HIS HONOUR THE SPECIAL JUDGE
SHRI.S.V.RANPISE (C.R.NO.17)
DATED : 16th DECEMBER, 2014.
Advocate Mr. Dilip Parmar for the Applicant/accused.
APP Shri. Desai for Respondent.
Application for bail u/s. 439 of Cr.P.C.
ORAL ORDER
This application is moved by the applicant under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for bail in connection with CR No. 90/14,
registered for the offence punishable under Section 7, 12, 13(1) (d)
and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 on 12.11.2014 with
A.C.B., Mumbai division.

2
Facts which give rise for filing this application in short,
are as follows:н
Applicant was arrested alongwith another accused in
connection with the offence which was registered with
A.C.B. Mumbai for the offence punishable u/s. 7,12,
13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of P.C.Act 1988 and now he is in
judicial custody and therefore he has filed this
application on the following grounds:н
GROUNDS :
Applicant is the only earning member in his family,
his family depends upon him, the custodial
interrogation is over, he has not committed any
offence as alleged, false offence is registered against
him, he has family to look after, applicant is ready and
willing to abide by any conditions imposed by the
Court.
The State has filed say and raised strong objection on
the ground that investigation is in progress and therefore applicant
is not entitled for bail.
Following points arise for my determination.
POINTS
1.

Is applicant entitled for bail as sought for?

2.

What order?

3
My findings thereon with reason thereto are as
follows:н
FINDINGS
1.

In the affirmative.

2.

As per final order.
REASONS
I have heard Ld. Advocate Mr.Dilip Parmar and Ld.
APP Mr. Desai for the State.
Point No.1
From the submissions and documents it is gathered
that custodial interrogation seems to be over. The applicant has
shown his ready and willingness to abide by any conditions imposed
upon by the Court. Moreover his family depends upon him. Under
such circumstances, I hold it proper to allow this Bail application by
imposing certain conditions. Hence, I answer Point No.1 in the
affirmative and proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
1. Application is allowed.
2. Applicant be enlarged on bail on executing P.R. Bond of
Rs. 15,000/н (Rs. Fifteen Thousand only) with solvent
surety in the like amount subject to the condition that
applicant should attend concerned A.C.B. office on
every Monday and Tuesday in between 10 am to
4
12.00 noon till filing of the chargesheet and should not
pressurize the witnesses and tamper with the evidence.

(S.V.RANPISE),
Special Judge
under P.C.Act
Mumbai
Date :н 16.12.2014
1. Dictated on
: 16.12.2014
2. Transcribed on : 16.12.2014
3. Signed on
: