The court granted anticipatory bail to Beena Rajendra Shah, apprehending arrest in a murder investigation. The applicant was unimplicated in the FIR and charge sheet. The court held arrest unnecessary and directed bail if arrested.
Anticipatory bail granted; if arrested, to be released on bail of Rs. 10,000 with one surety of similar amount.
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.834 OF 2010
Mrs.Beena Rajendra Shah )..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra )..Respondent
Mr. N.N.Gawankar i/by Mr.Arfan Sait for the applicant.
Mr.A.S.Gadkari APP for the State/respondent.
C oram : R.S.MOHITE,J
Date : 18th March, 2010
PC
1 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail. The present applicant is a lady
by name Beena Rajendra Shah. She files this application because she apprehends arrest in C.R.No.I-116/2008 registered by the Nalasopara police station. The case pertains to the alleged murder of one Multanmal Jain. The alleged murder of Multanmal Jain has occurred on 29.3.2008. The FIR in this case was lodged by one Sharda N. Patel who is the neighbor and relative of the deceased. It appears that in her FIR she did not implicate the present applicant. After the investigation is over, a charge-sheet came to be filed on 27.6.2008. Even in a charge-sheet, the present applicant is not made as an accused. The said complainant filed a writ petition in this Court making a grievance that her original FIR had not been properly recorded as in the FIR she had implicated the present applicant who was respondent no.3 in this petition. This Court disposed off that petition and held that police should record her additional statement and forward the same to the Magistrate
2
under Section 173 (8) of the Cr.P.C. Now that statement has been recorded on 25.8.2009 and on perusing the same it appears that the role of shouting `kill him’ is attributed to the present applicant. To my mind since a charge-sheet is already filed, no purpose would be served by the arrest of the present applicant and the case can proceed without arresting the applicant who is a lady. The other eye witness by name Mehul Patel also does not talk about the presence of the present applicant. In the circumstances, application deserves to be allowed. It is therefore, directed that in the event of arrest, the present applicant will be released on bail in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount subject to the condition that she will report to the investigating officer as and when called upon by him in writing. Application disposed off.
(R.S.MOHITE,J)
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant who apprehends arrest in a murder investigation where she was not implicated in the charge sheet.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Beena Rajendra Shah
The State of Maharashtra
R.S. Mohite
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
