Allowed

Dr. Vinayanand Bhanudas Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC29 Jun 2011APPLN/1967/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court confirmed interim anticipatory bail granted to a doctor accused of tampering with medical records. The court held that prima facie evidence of admission and treatment supported the prima facie case against the complainant, allowing the applicant to cooperate during investigation.

What did the court decide?

Confirmation of ad-interim relief of anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant.

Dr. Vinayanand Bhanudas Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

1 Cri.A.1967.11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1967 OF 2011

¶4

Dr.Vinayanand S/o Bhanudas Patil, R/o Rahata Tq. Rahata, District Ahmednagar ..... APPLICNT. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and others. ...RESPONDENTS.

¶5

... Shri.R.N.Dhorde, Advocate for Applicant. Shri.B.J.Sonwane,, A.P.P. for Respondents.

¶6

CORAM: T.V.NALAWADE, J.

¶7

DATE : 29th JUNE, 2011.

¶8

PER COURT :

¶9

This application is filed for anticipatory bail, in Crime No. 149 of

¶10

2009 registered with Kopargaon Police Station, Tq. Kopargaon District Ahmednagar, for the offence punishable under sections 325, 324, 323, 147, 148, 149, 354, 325, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The present crime is registered on the basis of complaint referred to Police under section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. APP is present with record. Both sides are heard.

¶11

2 Cri.A.1967.11

¶12

One Gorakh Teke had filed a private complaint, and after making investigation as per order made under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Kopargaon Police station has filed charge-sheet against one Annasaheb Sawaleram Teke, under section under sections 325, 324, 323, 147, 148, 149, 354, 325, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. In the charge-sheet present applicant is shown as witness and he has produced injury certificate in respect of two injured persons. After filing of this Charge-sheet Annasaheb Teke filed private complaint against the present applicant and this complaint came to be referred under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal procedure. Annasaheb has made allegation that Gorakh Take and his wife were not present on the alleged spot and they were present at other place, where the work of panchnama was going on and Gorakh has signed some documents which was created by the police officers at relevant time. Allegations are made against the present applicant is that he has created medical record to support the case of Gorakh and he has committed the offence punishable under sections 420, 464, 465, 467, 468, 471, of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

APP submitted that as there is material to make out prima facie case that Gorakh Teke could not have received treatment at the relevant time, in the hospital, ad-interim relief cannot be granted to Doctor. The copies of

¶14

3 Cri.A.1967.11

¶15

injury Certificate in respect of Gorakh Teke are on record and it shows that he was admitted in the hospital for about 2(two) days and operation was performed on the applicant by present applicant. At this stage, it needs to be kept in mind that police have collected the material in support of case filed on the basis of report filed by Gorakh. If Annasaheb Teke wants to prove that this record is false, there is an opportunity to Annasaheb Take to take such defence and prove that record is false at the time of trial. To investigate the case, there is power to police to take search of the hospital and seize the relevant record. In view of this circumstance, this Court holds that ad-interim relief of anticipatory bail granted in favour of the applicant needs to be confirmed. So, application is allowed, relief of adinterim anticipatory bail is confirmed. :

¶16

(a) The applicant shall co-operate during the investigation and to attend the concerned Police Station on coming Saturday and Sunday i.e. 02.07.2011 and 03.07.2011. from today between 9.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon.

¶17

(b) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses .

¶18

[ T.V.NALAWADE, J.]

¶19

MTK

¶20

4 Cri.A.1967.11

Dr. Vinayanand Bhanudas Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Vinayanand Bhanudas Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Kamalben Purushottam Patil Vs the State of Mah

Dinkar Bhivrao Dhapate Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Suresh Sukhdev Auchar Vs the State of Mahrashtra

Ramlalan Sham Tiwari and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shivaji Bapurao Yadav and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Devram @ Deorao Bajirao Shende Vs the State of Maharashtra