Allowed

Bena Dinesh Kanabar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC7 Jun 2006APPLN/1757/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order in a criminal application for bail. The court grants bail to the accused woman charged with possession of counterfeit currency, specifying conditions regarding surety, reporting, and district restriction.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount, subject to reporting and district restriction conditions.

Bena Dinesh Kanabar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

:1:

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1757 OF 2006

¶4

 Smt. Bena Dinesh Kanbar. ..Applicant.
 Vs.

¶5

 The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent.

¶6

 Mr. Mirza Y. i/by Pradip Jaiswal & Pavan Sarkale for
 the applicant.

¶7

 Mr. K.V.Saste, A.P.P. for the State.

¶8

CORAM : R.S. MOHITE,J.
DATED : 07/6/2006.

¶9

P.C.

¶10

 1. This is an application made by the applicant who is
 a lady. She is shown as an accused in C.R.No.27/2005
 registered by Bhayander police station for offences U/s.
 489(A), (B), (C), 420, 511, 120-B of the I.P.C. The co
 accused by name Dinesh Kanabar who claims to be her
 husband was arrested while using the counterfeit notes.
 He made a statement before the police that balance
 counterfeit notes were lying in the house where the
 applicant was staying. On search the applicant removed
 counterfeit notes from a tin box and handed over the
 same to the police. The total amount of counterfeit
 notes is Rs.1,14,000/- comprising of 100/- Rupees and
 500/- Rupees. Two other persons are shown as accused in

¶11

 this crime. As far as the present applicant is
 concerned, the offence prima facie appears to be one

¶12

:2:

¶13

 under Section 489(C). The applicant is a lady. No

¶14

 material is produced before me that the applicant was
 party to any conspiracy and except possessing
 counterfeit notes which were being used by her husband,
 there is no other material against the applicant. The
 applicant was arrested on 23.3.2006. The investigation
 is completed and charge sheet is filed. In the
 circumstances, I am inclined to grant bail to the

¶15

 applicant. In the circumstances, it is directed that

¶16

 pending trial the applicant may be released on bail in
 the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like
 amount subject to the further condition that the surety
 which will be furnished will be from the Greater Mumbai
 or Thane District. Further condition will be that the
 applicant will report to Bhayander Police Station once
 in a month on every first Monday till the disposal of
 the trial and she will not leave the Bombay or Thane
 District without the prior permission in writing of the
 concerned Investigating Officer. Application is
 disposed of.

¶17

(R. S. MOHITE, J.)

Bena Dinesh Kanabar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bena Dinesh Kanabar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paresh Vasanji Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ashok Shivram Utekar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajesh N. Lund Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ravish Rafiq Kharbe Vs the S.E.M. Bombay and Another.

Hasmukhalal v. Joshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shivaji Tulshiram Koyalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra