Allowed

Jakiya Sultana Abdul Rashid v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC18 Jan 2011APPLN/1/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Application for anticipatory bail filed by a Head Mistress accused of misappropriation. The court observed that filling a demand form without stock was not prima facie misappropriation and granted the application.

What did the court decide?

The ad-interim relief dated 6.1.2011 was made absolute, with the applicant required to attend on every Sunday till 30th April 2011.

Jakiya Sultana Abdul Rashid Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

Criminal Application No.1/2011

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2011

¶5

Jakiya Sultana Abdul Rashid	... APPLICANT
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra	... RESPONDENT

¶6

Shri P.N. Kutti, Advocate for the applicant Shri K.M. Suryawanshi, A.P.P. for the respondent

¶7

CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.

¶8

DATE : 18th January, 2011

¶9

PER COURT :

¶10

Heard learned counsel. The accused/ applicant, a Head Mistress in Anjuman Harakki-E-Talim at Jamner, District Jalgaon seeks exercise of powers under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, for an offence under Sections 420, 409, 468 of the Indian Penal Code. Reading the report, it is obvious, the applicant filled in a form, though there was already stock of rice. Filling of the form of demand of rice by itself would not prima facie amount to misappropriation. Non accounting of excess rice will also not involve for seeking custodial interrogation. Record is with the office, there is primarily conflict between the trust/ its members and the accused/

¶11

¶12

Criminal Application No.1/2011

¶13

applicant is made a scapegoat in the quid of the Trustees.

¶14

The ad-interim relief dated 6.1.2011 is made absolute,

¶15

with attendance on every Sunday till 30th April 2011. Application

¶16

allowed.

¶17

K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE

¶18

fmp/cri1.11

Jakiya Sultana Abdul Rashid v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jakiya Sultana Abdul Rashid v. the State of Maharashtra

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

Balasaheb Rangnathrao Kulkarni Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Shaikh Layak Shaikh Noor Lmohammad and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kumar @ Tukaram Masaji Ghansawant Vs State of Mah

Vikas Balasaheb Khose Vs the State of Maharashtra

Omprakash Yadavrao Shekhapure Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shobha Prakash Ayachit Vs Rajendra Vinayakrao Ayachit and Anr.