Allowed

Ramesh Shankar Hadge and 2 Ors. v. the State of Mah. Thru. P.S.O.

Bombay HC8 Jun 2007APPLN/1461/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Nagpur considered an application for anticipatory bail sought by two applicants accused of offences under Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC. The court considered their age, separate residence, and the lack of prima facie need for custodial interrogation, granting bail upon arrest with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail upon arrest, release on bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety, subject to attending police station and cooperating with investigation.

Ramesh Shankar Hadge and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Mah. Thru… — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 1461/2007

¶3

Notes, Office Memoranda of

¶4

Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶5

Court's or Judge's Orders.

¶6

CORAM : A.P. Lavande, J DATE : 8.6.2007

¶7

Heard Mr. Sonbhadre, learned counsel for the applicants and Mrs. Jog, learned A.P.P. for the respondent.

¶8

At the outset, Mr. Sonbhadre, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that he is not pressing the application in so far as the applicant no.3 Vijay Ramesh Hadge is concerned and states that he will surrender before the Magistrate and apply for bail. In view of the statement made by Mr. Sonbhadre, the application in so far as applicant Vijay Ramesh Hadge is concerned, is dismissed as not pressed.

¶9

Applicants 1 and 2 apprehending arrest in crime no. 51/07 for the offence punishable under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Gadchiroli Police Station, seek anticipatory bail. The applicants 1 and 2 apprehend that they may be arrested pursuant to F.I.R. registered by Sadhana w/o Vijay Hadge. According to Mr. Sonbhadre the applicants are staying

¶10

¶11

separately and they have not taken any part in the alleged commission of the offence and, therefore, this is a fit case in which the applicants deserve to be granted anticipatory bail.

¶12

Per contra, Mrs. Jog, learned A.P.P. states that there is prima facie case under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the applicants. However, it is not disputed by Mrs. Jog that investigation papers reveal that the applicants are staying separately. According to Mrs. Jog, the applicants were instigating their son to demand money from his wife.

¶13

Considering the nature of the allegations and the investigation carried out so far and also considering the age factors of the applicants 1 and 2, I am of the considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the applicants 1 and 2 is not warranted for the investigation of the crime and this is a fit case in which applicants 1 and 2 deserve to be released on bail in the event of their arrest. Hence, I pass the following order.

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicants 1 and 2 in connection with the crime no. 51/07 registered in Police Station, Gadchiroli, each of them shall be released on bail upon executing the bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer subject to following conditions.

¶15

¶16

i) The applicants 1 and 2 shall attend the Police Station, Gadchiroli as and when directed by the investigating officer and shall also cooperate with the investigating officer in the investigation of the crime;

¶17

ii) The applicants 1 and 2 shall not directly or indirectly tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶18

This order shall be operating till filing of the charge

¶19

sheet.

¶20

The application is disposed of. Hamdast allowed.

¶21

Judge

¶22

patle

Ramesh Shankar Hadge and 2 Ors. v. the State of Mah. Thru. P.S.O.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Shankar Hadge and 2 Ors. v. the State of Mah. Thru. P.S.O.

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

Yashwant Ramkrushna Meshram Vs State of Maha. Thru. Police Station and Anor.

Dinesh S/O Gunwant Tule Vs State of Mah. Thru P.S.O.

Narendra Sheshrao Pawade Vs Mohan Janradhan Pawade and Another

Sandeep S/O Shankar Sorte and Anor. Vs the State of Mah.Thr.Pso,Sakkardara,Nagpur

Nandkishor S/O Rambhau Choudhary Vs Balabhau S/O Ramchandraji Ganorkar

Nandksihor S/O Rambhau Choudhary Vs Balabhau Ramchandraji Ganorkar