Disposed

Liyakat Sayyad Ahmad Quadri and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Nr

Bombay HC13 Feb 2007APPLN/16/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order dismissing a criminal application for bail relaxation. The grant is adjourned pending an investigation into allegations of extortion and misconduct by the investigating officer mentioned in the application.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; matter adjourned for two weeks to allow filing of affidavit by the State post the filing of the charge sheet.

Liyakat Sayyad Ahmad Quadri and Anr. Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.16 OF 2007

¶3

 Liyakat Sayyad Ahmad Quadri

¶4

 and Anr. .. Applicants

¶5

 Versus
 The State of Maharashtra

¶6

 and Anr. .. Respondents

¶7

 Mr.Pramod Kathane i/b. K.S.Patil for applicants
 Mrs.M.M.Deshmukh, A.P.P. for State.

¶8

 CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.

¶9

 DATE : 13th February 2007.

¶10

 P.C.

¶11

 . Learned Advocate appearing in support of
 this application, which prays for relaxation of

¶12

¶13

 the condition to report at Mhasla police station
 once a week, brings to my notice the averment at
 para 3 which reads thus:-

¶14

 "3. The applicants state that as per
 the order of this Hon’ble Court they are
 regularly attending the police station.
 The applicants state that the
 investigating officer asked them to sit
 in the police station for hour an hour.
 The applicants state that concerned
 officer also offer tea and snack to all
 the staff members and ask the applicants
 to pay charges of it. The applicants
 state that the investigating officer
 demanded Rs.35,000/- from them and also
 threatened them to implicate false case
 against them. The applicants state that
 the officer denied to take their
 attendance in the register. The
 applicant states that the concerned

¶15

¶16

 officer also asked them to fill up petrol
 in his bike at the applicants costs".

¶17

 2. Learned A.P.P. seeks time to take
 instructions and to file an affidavit of the
 I.O./In-charge of the police station. Needless
 to state that if these averments are not dealt
 with by filing an affidavit, this court would
 take a serious view of the same and direct a
 superior officer to investigate and enquire into
 the above allegations and take disciplinary
 action against all concerned, so also to make a
 report to this Court in that behalf.

¶18

 3. To give an opportunity to I.O./In-charge
 of the police station, S.O. two weeks. In the
 meanwhile, Mrs.Deshmukh informs me that the
 charge sheet is filed in this case. Post this
 application after two weeks.

¶19

¶20

 (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)

Liyakat Sayyad Ahmad Quadri and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Nr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Liyakat Sayyad Ahmad Quadri and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Nr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Milind Vaman Khanolkar and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ashok Govind Malushte and Anr. Vs Arun Manaji Kale

Raghoba Nhanu Desai (Decd.)by Lrs.-Shriram Raghoba Desai and Ors. Vs Ganpat Arjun Desai (Decd.)by Lrs.Sunitra Ganpat Desai and Ors.

Lilaram Shivram Bhamare and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Laxman Govind Awate Vs Bapu Dattatrya Murar and Ors.

Dhondiram Baburao Patil (Yadav) Vs Dhondiram Tukaram Yadav and Ors.