Bombay High Court
Sumitkumar Rajeshkumar Sharma vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 29 October, 2021
Bench: M.S. Sonak, Pushpa V. Ganediwala
1 45-apeal-397-21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 397 OF 2021
Sumitkumar Rejeshkumar Sharma
Vs.
State of Maharashtra and another
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
Shri U. J. Deshpande, Advocate for appellant.
Shri V. A. Thakre, A.P.P. for respondent/State.
Shri Shashibhushan Wahane, Advocate for respondent no. 2.
CORAM :- M. S. SONAK AND
PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.
DATED :- 29.10.2021
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This appeal is taken up for final disposal at
the request and with consent of the learned counsel for
the parties.
3. This is an appeal directed against the order
dated 13.08.2021 made by the Additional Sessions
Judge, Akola rejecting the petitioner's application for
release on bail.
4. There is no serious dispute that the co-
accused in the same matter Chetan Prakash Rathod has
been released on bail by this Court vide judgment and
order dated 04.08.2021 in Criminal Appeal No.
253/2021. Therefore, on the grounds of parity, the
appellant herein is also entitled to be enlarged on bail.
RR Jaiswal
2 45-apeal-397-21.odt
5. Shri V. A. Thakre, learned A.P.P. for State and
Shri Sashibhushan Wahane, learned counsel, who
appears on behalf of respondent no. 2 (victim), however
pointed out that the present appellant's relatives have
issued threats to the victim and further, the present
appellant, used to reside in Uttar Pradesh.
6. In response to this Shri Deshpande, learned
counsel for the appellant submits that allegation of threat
may not be correct but, in any case, the appellant will
ensure that no such threats are received by the victim.
Shri Deshpande, learned counsel further submits that the
appellant will not return to Uttar Pradesh and is even
prepared to attend the Police Station Khadan, Dist. Akola
ever single day if he is released on bail.
7. Accordingly, we allow this appeal and set
aside the impugned order dated 13.08.2021 made by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola.
8. The appellant is directed to be released on
bail on his executing P. R. bond of ₹ 10,000/- (Rs. Ten 10,000/- (Rs. Ten
thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount.
The appellant is directed to attend Police Station Khadan,
Dist. Akola once a week i.e. on every Monday between
10.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. and mark his attendance.
9. The appellant shall not influence any of the
prosecution witnesses, in any manner, either by himself
or through some persons having connection on his behalf
RR Jaiswal
3 45-apeal-397-21.odt
or issue any threat or otherwise interfere with the victim
and prosecution witnesses.
10. The appellant, before his release on bail, is
directed to pay costs of ₹ 10,000/- (Rs. Ten 2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand) to
the respondent no. 2 (victim), in pursuance of the order
made by this Court for the victim to attend this criminal
proceedings.
11. Shri Sashibhushan Wahane, learned counsel
appointed to appear on behalf of the respondent no. 2
(victim) has declined to accept any fees by submitting
that he has only discharged his duties. We, very much
appreciate this gesture on the part of Shri Wahane and
express our gratitude to him.
12. Criminal Application (APPA) No. 547/2021
does not survive and is accordingly disposed of.
13. The Criminal Appeal is allowed and disposed
of in the above said terms.
(PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.) (M. S. SONAK, J.)
RR Jaiswal
