Criminal appeal against order rejecting anticipatory bail. Applicant charged with forgery for manipulating ration card to secure residential benefit. High Court held custodial interrogation necessary and rejected application.
Anticipatory bail application rejected; custodial interrogation deemed necessary.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2859 OF 2009
Chandramohan Gopinath Dubey ........ Applicant versus
The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent.
Mr. S.H. Mishra adv. for the Applicant Mr. J.P. Yagnik APP. for the Respondent/State.
CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 27th July, 2009.
P. C.:
2
card wherein the following names were included : Chandramohan Gopinath Dubey, Sandip, Kalavatidevi, Jayalaxmi, Vijayalaxmi Dhanalaxmi and Amit, and whereas by erasing the names at serial no.2 and 7 the names of Girijashankar and Shashikant are included in the said card and the said forged document prima facie appears to have been used for obtaining benefit in the nature of allotment of residential premises. Prior to the present application being moved before this court, similar application was filed before the Sessions court and the Sessions court being of the view that custodial interrogation is necessary, has rejected the application.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present case is fit for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant apprehending arrest for forgery offences.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chandramohan Gopinath Dubey
The State of Maharashtra
A. P Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
