Allowed

Nagorao Malharrao Bendrikar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Jan 2011APPLN/2/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal application sought to make absolute an interim protection granted to applicants accused of robbery and clerical fabrication charges. The High Court examined allegations of fabrication and custody issues and confirmed the protection with attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection dated 6.1.2011 made absolute with condition of attendance up to 31st May, 2011.

Nagorao Malharrao Bendrikar and Ors. Vs the State of… — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2/2011 (1.Nagorao s/o Malharrao Bendrikar and Ors. Vs. The State of Mah.)

¶5

Office notes, office Memoranda of

¶6

Coram,appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders

¶7

Court’s or Judge’s orders.

¶8

Mr.Gajanan Kadam, Adv. for applicants;

¶9

Mr.NB Patil, APP for State.

¶10

¶11

CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL,J.

¶12

DATE : 19th January, 2011.

¶13

1) Heard.

¶14

2) The learned APP is equipped with the investigation papers.

¶15

3) The applicants, based on prosecution in
Crime No.251/2009 for an offence under
Section 395 of IPC, were in custody for
22 days. The grievance is, for the
period the applicants were not in
service, their salaries are withdrawn
from the disbursement officials, this is
so done by fabricating the record.

¶16

4) ThelearnedCounselforthe

¶17

applicants/accused submits that the
applicant No.1 though is Chairman of the
institution, is a whistle-blower against
the atrocities of the police of
Bhagyanagar, Nanded and has suffered and
paid for the same by the present

¶18

¶19

prosecution.

¶20

5) He informs, the complainant is a
neighbour of applicant no.1 and civil
disputes in relation to the property are
at its peak. Taking advantage of the
situation, the complainant, a stooge for
the prosecution initiated at the
instance of police.

¶21

6) Having gone through the investigation
papers, I find though at some stage it
is said that fabricated salary bills are
submitted, however, the salary statement
of April-2010 (page 56) illustrate that
excess amount, received by the applicant
is either deposited/credited by the
applicant no.4 himself. The excess
amount thus is not now lying with the
applicants/accused. The audit of the
institution is not yet commenced. The
Zilla Parishad has even not taken any
action against the applicants/accused.
Though the police have informed,
applicant no.1 having faced several
other prosecutions, however for the
present matter, custody of any of the
applicants/accused is not desired as
they are permanent residents of the
area, gainfully employed and applicant
no.1 is an Editor of the newspaper and
also Chairman of the educational
institution.

¶22

7) In the result, interim protection dated

¶23

¶24

6.1.2011 is made absolute with the
condition of attendance. The attendance
to remain in force up to 31st May, 2011.
The Investigator or the SHO of the
concerned Police Station shall, without
any demur, furnish acknowledgment to the
applicants/accused, if they attend the
police station in compliance of the
order of the Court.

¶25

(K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE

¶26

bdv/

Nagorao Malharrao Bendrikar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagorao Malharrao Bendrikar and Ors. 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

Jakiya Sultana Abdul Rashid Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vikas Balasaheb Khose Vs the State of Maharashtra

Omprakash Yadavrao Shekhapure Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mohan Kedu Kathmore Vs the State of Mah

Rahul Anna Jadhav Vs the State of Mah

Chatrabhuj Soma Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.