STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. RAJESH SHRINIVAS KUKEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an Application filed by the Applicant seeking cancellation of the bail granted to the Respondents by the order of this Court dated 14 December 2009. The Respondents herein had filed Criminal Appeal 978 of 2009 questioning the correctness of their conviction for offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. This Court had directed that the present Respondents be released on bail on each of the Respondents furnishing a PR bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/ - with one solvent surety in the like amount. This Court further directed the Respondents to attend the D.N. Nagar Police Station once in a month in the first week of the month between 4.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. till the disposal of the Appeal. This Court further directed that the Respondents shall not commit any cognizable offence while on bail.

(2.) In the Application filed on behalf of the Applicant State, it is pointed out that Respondent No.1 has not attended the D.N. Nagar Police Station once in a month as directed by this Court. Respondent No.1 has thus violated condition No.2 of the order releasing the Respondent on bail. It is further urged before us by giving the details of the pending offence against the Applicant that the Applicant has committed the offence whilst he was released on bail. It appears that the D.N. Nagar Police Station has registered an offence vide Crime No.319 of 2010 under Sections 323, 324, 326, 160 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the Applicant was arrested on 18 October 2010. Another offence was registered by the D.N. Nagar Police Station vide Crime No.177 of 2011 under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code and Respondent No.1 was arrested on 8 October 2011. Respondent No.1 has also been arrested by the Anti-Terrorist Squad, Mumbai in Crime No.27 of 2011 under Sections 3, 25 of the Arms Act read with Section 37(1)(a) read with 35 of the Bombay Police Act. It further appears that Rabale Police Station had also arrested Respondent No.1 on 20 July 2011 in respect of an offence vide Crime No.377 of 2011 under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 302, 109, 120-B, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code read with the provisions of the Arms Act. In respect of Respondent No.2 it is alleged that D.N. Nagar Police Station has registered an offence vide Crime No.319 of 2010 under Sections 323, 324, 326, 160 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Respondent No.2 was arrested on 18 October 2010.

(3.) Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.1 has urged before us that this Application for cancellation of bail has been filed by the Applicant State without prior authorization for filing of the same. The Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has invited our attention to the judgment of the Learned Single Judge of this Court in Thomas Fernandes v. State of Goa, 2004 6 LJS 140 in which the Learned Single Judge of this Court at paragraph 5 had come to the conclusion that the Courts also exercise the suo motu powers of the cancellation of bail if it is brought to the notice of the Court that the accused has committed a breach of the conditions which permits his release on bail. Even if it is presumed that the present Application has been filed without prior authorization, the Court can suo motu take cognizance of the breach committed by the accused. It is urged by counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.1 that Respondent No.1 has. been falsely implicated in the said case and has now been released on bail.