Gopal Pandurang Hisekar And ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 9494 Bom

                                          1                                      APL765.17.odt


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               : NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.


          CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 765 OF 2017


 APPLICANTS            : 1]     Gopal Pandurang Hisekar,
                                Aged about 46 years, Occu. Agriculturist,
                                Now residing at Survey No.23,
                                Ambegaon pathar, Pune - 46.

                          2]    Sunil Ramdas Hisekar,
                                Aged about 25 years,
                                Occu. Agricultural labourer.

                          3]    Kishor Ramdas Hisekar,
                                Aged about 28 years, 
                                Occu. Agricultural labourer.

                                Nos.2 and 3 now residing at Chakan,
                                MIDC, Pune - 46

                                All the applicants are permanent R/o Village
                                Swasani, Tah. Mangrulpir,Dist. Washim.

                                              VERSUS

 NON-APPLICANT:                State of Maharashtra,
                               through Police Station Officer,
                               Police Station, Mangrulpir, Dist. Washim.

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Shri J. B. Gandhi, Advocate for the applicant.
            Shri K. L. Dharmadhikari, A.P.P. for the non-applicant/State 
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE, J.

                      DATE     : DECEMBER, 11, 2017


 ORAL JUDGMENT





                                     2                                  APL765.17.odt


                  Rule. Rule   made   returnable   forthwith.     Heard   finally

with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This is an application for relaxation of condition i.e.

condition no.2(a) imposed upon the applicants by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Mangrulpir, by the order dated 29.6.2017

in Misc. Criminal Application No. 105/2017 while releasing them on

bail.

3. The application of the applicants was considered

favourably by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and released

them on bail on their executing PR bond of Rs.15,000/- each. While

releasing the applicants on bail, the learned Judge of the trial Court

has imposed the following condition :

"2. (a) They shall not enter into the village Swasni, Tq. Mangrulpir, Dist. Washim until further order.

4. Subsequently, within a period of three months i.e. on

28.9.2017, an application (Exh.22) for relaxation of condition was

moved by the present applicants. The said application was partly

allowed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mangrulpir vide

3 APL765.17.odt

order dated 13.10.2017. The learned Judge has relaxed the

condition only for a period from 17.10.2017 to 22.10.2017. The

learned Judge also ordered that before entering village Swasni, Tah.

Mangrulpir on 17.10.2017, the applicants/accused shall attend

Police Station, Mangrulpir and at the time of leaving the village they

shall also attend the Police Station and shall file their attendance

document in the Court. This is the order, which is impugned in this

application.

5. I see no merit in the application. The applicants were

released on bail by the learned trial Court on a condition that they

shall not enter into the village. Within a period of three months of

the order, after availing the benefit of bail, the application for

relaxation of condition is moved. The learned Judge of the trial

Court has considered the application, in my view, correctly. There is

no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. Consequently, the

criminal application is rejected. Rule discharged.

JUDGE

Diwale