STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. VINOD MORESHWAR VAIDYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has come to this Court by way of Criminal Writ Petition to challenge the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Raigad, in Criminal Revision Application No. . . 94 of 1986, where under the Bail granted to accused nos. 1 to 5 by the J. M. F. e. was confirmed and certain conditions were added that the accused shall give attendance to the Police Station, Poladpur, between 8 A. M. and 9 A. M. on every day for a period of one week and they shall remain with the police though the day in the course of investigation, if any.

(2.) IT is not necessary in fact to state in details the facts of the case. The offence alleged to have been committed by the 5 accused is under sections 436, 120b, 114 r. w. section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation appears to be that the said accused are responsible for the fire of Mahad Cooperative Urband Bank at Poladpur. It appears that the police produced the accused persons before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mahad and prayed for police custody. The learned Magistrate refused to give Police Custody and granted bail. The State preferred a revision application against the said order to the Sessions Court and the Sessions Court passed the order as stated earlier. . The offences are alleged to have taken place in October 1986. Therefore, in fact it is futile to consider the present application now in 1990. However, it must be also stated here that the learned Sessions Judge while confirming the order of Bail passed by the learned Magistrate, has taken care to see that the presence of the accused is available to the police for investigation purposes. Under these circumstances also it cannot be said that the learned Sessions Judge was in error in confirming the order of bail passed by the Judicial Magistrate. Hence, this Writ Petition has no merit and the same will have to be dismissed and accordingly is dismissed. Rule discharged