ITEM NO.57                 COURT NO.9               SECTION IIA OUT TODAY

           S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F   I N D I A                          RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS                      Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).905/2009

(From the judgement and order dated 11/07/2008 in  CRLA No. 1535/2008  of The HIGH COURT  OF BOMBAY)

RAVINDRANATH HARISHCHANDRA ANGRE                     Petitioner(s)

                     VERSUS

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                                 Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned Judgment, bail, exemption from filing  O.T. of annexures,permission to file additional documents and office report )

Date: 01/05/2009  This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.M. LODHA

For Petitioner(s) Mr.Arun Jaitley, Sr.Adv. Mr.Shree Prakash Sinha, Adv.

                   Mr. Shekhar Kumar,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure,Adv.

          UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following                                O R D E R  

Leave granted.

The appeal is disposed of.

[ Usha Bhardwaj ]             [ Vijay Dhawan]   Court Master               Court Master

    Signed order is placed on the file.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINALL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.886 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.905 of 2009

Ravindranath Harishchandra Angre ...Appellant(s)

Versus

State of Maharashtra ...Respondent(s)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

This appeal is directed against the order dated 11th July, 2008 passed by  

the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Application No.1535 of 2008.  

By  the  impugned order  the  High  Court  has  rejected  the  application  filed  by the  

appellant for grant of bail in the case arising out of F.I.R. No.I-445/2007 dated 19th  

October,  2007,  registered   under  Sections  323,  392,  384,  504  and  506  read  with  

Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and bearing  in mind the fact  

that the charge sheet has already been filed on 9th April, 2008 and the appellant has  

been in custody since 22nd February, 2008, in our opinion, it is  a fit case where the  

benefit of regular bail should be granted to the appellant.

..2/-

:2:

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed; the impugned order is set aside and it is

directed that the appellant shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing  personal bond  

in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one surety in the  

like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.  The appellant shall not, directly or  

indirectly  influence  the  witnesses  and  shall  not  leave  India  without  the  previous  

approval of the trial court.

The appeal stands disposed of in the above terms.

                                       ..................J.               (D.K. JAIN)  

                                ..................J.

             (R.M. LODHA) New Delhi, MAY 01, 2009.