RAYMOND @ RINKY JANBUX PATEL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner along with 4 others, is alleged to have entered a wine shop of one Sanjay Shinde, of which one George Lonan was the Manager, on 2 -2-1996 at about 10-25 p.m. Petitioner was then armed with a revolver. He is alleged to have held that revolver against the face of the complainant and other looted cash of Rs.11,850.00 and 6 whisky bottles worth Rs.950.00. Information of this incident was not lodged till 16-2-1996. When the petitioner who involved in another similar case and was arrested and during interrogation appears to have disclosed about this incident. Accordingly, he was taken to the shop of Sanjay Shinde, then Manager of the shop Geroge Linan identified him as the person who held revolver. Accordingly, petitioner came to be arrested in this case also. He applied for grant of bail to the Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, but that came to be rejected and that is how, the present application has been filed.

(2.) It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that though incident is dated 2-2-1996, complaint in that behalf came to be lodged on 16-2-1996 and the funny explanation has been given that the complainant George Lonan informed his master Shinde on 6.2.1996 about the incident when the latter told him that there was already delay and no useful purpose would be served by lodging complaint at such be lasted stage since miscreants are likely to take revenge. It appears that identification parade was thereafter held and therein complainant George Golan identified the petitioner, so also other workers in the wine shop. In this behalf, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was already shown to the complainant and necessarily other persons must be present in the shop at that time and, therefore, identification parade is of no value. Besides revolver, there is no other recovery from the petitioner to connect him with the incident. As such, it was submitted that this is a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner.

(3.) AFTER going through the record and hearing both sides, I find that there is weak type of evidence in this case and in the circumstances, this is a fit a case to grant bail. Accordingly, petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing solvent surety to the extent of Rs.20,000.00 (twenty thousand) and PR bond for like amount, on condition that he shall report to Tardeo Police Station on every day until further orders.