Bombay High Court

Jayesh Jeetnarayan Singh vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 6 August, 2024

Bench: Revati Mohite Dere, Prithviraj K. Chavan

2024:BHC-AS:31817-DB

19-IA-3010-2023.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3010 OF 2023
(For Bail)
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3432 OF 2023
(For Suspension)
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 136 OF 2023

Jayesh Jeetnarayan Singh ... Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra And Anr. ... Respondents

Mr. Shirish Sawant a/w Ms. Sonal V. Parab, Ms. Esha Vasant Rane i/b
Rajeev Sawant and Associates, for the Applicant.

Mrs. P. P. Shinde, A.P.P, for the Respondent - State.

Mr. Kunal Tiwari i/b K. Juris Law Firm, for the Respondent No.2.

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, JJ.

DATE : 6th AUGUST, 2024.

P. C. :

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2 By these applications, the applicant seeks suspension of his

sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final

disposal of the aforesaid appeal.
Digitally
signed by Rekha Patil 1/9
REKHA
REKHA PRAKASH
PRAKASH PATIL
PATIL Date:
2024.08.09
17:06:39
+0530

::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/08/2024 19:38:29 :::
19-IA-3010-2023.odt

3 The applicant alongwith co-accused vide Judgment and Order

dated 30th May 2022, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Borivali Division, Dindoshi, Mumbai, in Sessions Case No.84 of

2013, has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

- for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of the

ndian Penal Code, to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of

Rs.7,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1

year;

- for the offence punishable under Section 364 r/w 34 of the

Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and

to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous

imprisonment for 1 year;

- for the offence punishable under Section 201 r/w 34 of the

Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and

to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous

imprisonment for 6 months.

The aforesaid sentences were directed to run concurrently.

4 Learned Counsel for the applicant seeks bail on the ground of

parity. He submits that co-accused Ajay Jeetnarayan Singh has been

Rekha Patil 2/9

::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/08/2024 19:38:29 :::
19-IA-3010-2023.odt

released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Coram: A.

S. Gadkari and Shyam C. Chandak, JJ.) vide order dated 9 th January,

2024. Learned Counsel for the applicant has tendered an affidavit-

cum-undertaking of the applicant, in view of the grievance made by

the learned APP, that the applicant has antecedents as well as the

grievance that, whilst on parole, the applicant had gone outside the

first informant's house and was staring at her. The said affidavit of

the applicant is duly affirmed before the Jailor, Nagpur Central

Prison on 29th July, 2024. The same is taken on record.

5 Learned APP does not dispute that the role of applicant is

similar to that of co-accused- Ajay Jeetnarayan Singh. She, however,

submits that the applicant has three antecedents. Learned APP has

filed an affidavit setting out the antecedents of the applicant.

Learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 also opposed the

applications.

6 Perused the papers. On 17th December, 2012 at about 2:00

a.m., PW-1 Shivani Singh had approached the Dahisar Police Station

to lodge a complaint as against her two brothers-in-law i.e. the

Rekha Patil 3/9

::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/08/2024 19:38:29 :::
19-IA-3010-2023.odt

accused and accused No.4- Ajay Jeetnarayan Singh, pursuant to

which, the police lodged an FIR as against the applicant and

accused- Ajay Jeetnarayan Singh, for the offences punishable under

Sections 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code ('I.P.C.').

PW-1 in her FIR has alleged that the applicant and Ajay Singh

physically assaulted her and hurled abuses at her. It appears that

again on the very same day i.e. on 17 th December, 2012, at about

12:00 noon, the First Informant i.e. PW-1 Shivani again visited the

police station to enquire about the progress of her FIR, where she

met PW2- Bhavesh Skhukla, brother of deceased (Mahesh Shukla),

who had come to lodge a missing report of his brother. Pursuant

thereto, PW1 - Shivani gave her supplementary statement stating

therein, that the applicant/original accused No.1, accused No. 4-

Ajay Jeetnarayan Singh and accused Nos.2 and 5 had kidnapped

Mahesh Shukla. Pursuant thereto, the police added Section 364 r/w

34 of the I.P.C. to the FIR already registered with the Dahisar Police

Station. It appears that again on 20 th December 2012 i.e. after 3 days

of the lodging of the FIR, the dead body of Mahesh was found in a

nala at Virar. Pursuant thereto, the police recorded the second

supplementary statement of PW1-Shivani. In the said supplementary

Rekha Patil 4/9

::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/08/2024 19:38:29 :::
19-IA-3010-2023.odt

statement, for the first time, PW1 - Shivani disclosed the name of

Jignesh as being present at the spot alongwith the other accused.

Based on the supplementary statement and the finding of the dead

body, the police added Sections 302 and 201 r/w 34 of the I.P.C. to

the FIR. It appears that there are four eye witnesses to the incident

of kidnapping of the deceased by the accused No.1 (Applicant),

accused No. 4 and others, i.e. PW1- Shivani Singh, PW2-Bhavesh

Shukla, PW3 - Deepak Singh and PW4 - Ashish Dabhade. As far as

PW2- Bhavesh Shukla is concerned, his evidence appears to be

hearsay and as such, no reliance can be placed on his evidence.

Although, PW1-Shivani Singh in her examination-in-chief has stated

that that the applicant and accused No.4 and others kidnapped

Mahesh Shukla, in her cross-examination, she has denied disclosing

the same to the police. As far as PW3 - Deepak is concerned, his

statement was recorded after seven days i.e. on 25 th December,

2012. As far as PW4- Ashish is concerned, it appears that his

statement was recorded on 1 st January, 2013. Prima faice, there is a

delay in recording of the statements of PW-3 and PW-2. There are

also discrepancies with regard to the exact role played by the

applicant. As far as parity with co-accused-Ajay Singh is concerned,

Rekha Patil 5/9

::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/08/2024 19:38:29 :::
19-IA-3010-2023.odt

it appears that there is recovery of the weapon at the behest of

accused-Ajay Singh as well as PW 12 saw accused-Ajay Singh

washing an Innova Car after the commission of the offence. As far

as the applicant is concerned, there is recovery of an Innova Car at

his instance. Admittedly, the Innova Car is not in the applicant's

name. As far as CA report is concerned, the same is inconclusive.

The role of the applicant is similar to that of co-accused-Ajay Singh,

who has been enlarged on bail. Apart from the aforesaid fact, the

record indicates that the applicant is in custody since 17 th December,

2012 i.e. for more than 11 years. The Appeal is also not likely to be

heard in the immediate near future.

7 Since, the learned APP pointed out the antecedents of the

applicant, learned Counsel for the applicant, today, tendered an

affidavit-cum-undertaking dated 29th July, 2024 duly affirmed before

the Jailor, Nagpur Central Prison, Nagpur. In the said affidavit, the

applicant in para 2 and 3 has stated, as under;

" 2. I say that, I hereby undertake that, I shall not
to enter the jurisdiction of Dahisar Police Station,
Mumbai where the Original Complainant and the
Victim's family are presently residing, till the final

Rekha Patil 6/9

::: Uploaded on - 09/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/08/2024 19:38:29 :::
19-IA-3010-2023.odt

hearing and disposal of Criminal Appeal No.136
of 2023.

3. I say that, I shall neither seek any dispensation
or modification of this undertaking in future nor
make any attempt to establish any contact with the
Original Complainant or the victim's family by
any mode of communication till the final hearing
and disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 136 of
2023."

8 Considering the aforesaid as well the applicant's affidavit, the

applications are allowed and the applicant's sentence is suspended

and he is enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of

his Appeal, on the following terms and conditions;

ORDER

i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing

P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one

or two sureties in the like amount;

ii) The Applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of

the Dahisar Police Station, Mumbai, including

19-IA-3010-2023.odt

where the complainant and the victim's family