(Prashant Rahi s/o Narayan Sanglikar Vs.State of Maharashtra, thr. P.S.O., Aheri)


Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders
or directions and Registrar’s orders.

Mr. S. P. Gadling, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mrs. Bharti Dangre, Public Prosecutor for Non­Applicant/State.

CORAM : S. B. SHUKRE, J. DATE : AUGUST 25, 2014.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

Offences punishable under Sections 13, 18, 20, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short, “the Act, 1967”) have been registered against the present applicant by Police Station, Aheri. Now, the investigation is complete with charge­sheet having been filed against the applicant along with other co­accused.

The applicant has been sought to be roped in the afore­stated offences on the basis of seizure of some incriminating material from his person on 02/9/2013.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has submitted that a set of documents consisting of eight pages sufficiently shows that the applicant is not only a member

page1image13120 page1image13280 page1image13440 page1image13600 page1image13760 page1image13920 page1image14080

::: Downloaded on – 27/08/2014 20:33:30 :::

Bombay High Court

2508ba541.14 2/4

of banned organisation, CPI (Maoist) but is also actively involved in terrorist activities by indulging in various overt acts. She has taken me through these documents allegedly seized from the custody of the present applicant, to support her argument.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that there is no prima facie evidence to show that these documents were seized from the custody of the present applicant and, therefore, at this stage itself, it could be said that the allegations made against the applicant are not true and, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.

There is no doubt about the fact that the documents stated to be seized from the custody of the applicant show that one Rahi has been assigned specific role of carrying out the arms and objects of the banned organisation. But, it will also have to be seen whether the applicant on his part was prima faice party to what has been assigned to him by the banned organisation and this fact can be found only if the prosecution prima facie establishes any link between the applicant and the seizure of the incriminating documents.

If one goes through the body search panchanama


Bombay High Court

2508ba541.14 3/4

dated 02/9/2013, one can find that some papers, in all eight pages, relating to one naxal organisation have been seized from the custody of the applicant. The documents, which are stated to be seized in this manner, are from page Nos. 260 to 267 of the charge­sheet. A bare perusal of these papers would show that they have been given specific titles and, therefore, are capable of being described according to those titles. But, the Investigating Officer, who has seized those documents, has not taken care to make proper description of these documents in the seizure panchanama. Signatures of panch witnesses also do not appear, at this stage, anywhere on the seized documents. Therefore, as rightly submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant, at this stage, there is a reasonable doubt about seizure of these documents from the custody of the applicant and if this is so, it would also create a further doubt in applicant’s prima facie sharing the ideology and philosophy of the banned organisation and also indulging in intentionally giving his support to the terrorist activities of the banned organisation.

In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for securing

::: Downloaded on – 27/08/2014 20:33:30 :::

Bombay High Court

2508ba541.14 4/4


release on bail and accordingly the application deserves to be allowed.

The application is allowed.

It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a P. R. Bond of Rs.50,000/­ (rupees fifty thousand only) together with one solvent surety in the like sum or two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/­ each on the conditions that the applicant shall regularly attend the trial, shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall cooperate with the Court in expeditious disposal of the case.


page4image6880 page4image7040