Allowed

Raghunath Namdeo Padolkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC15 Oct 2012ABA/901/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application for the applicant in Crime No. 85 of 2012 involving alleged cheating. The court permitted the applicant to deposit the bail amount post-arrest and ordered release on bail with specific conditions regarding availability for interrogation and attendance in court.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed; applicant to be released on police report bond with sureties in case of arrest.

Raghunath Namdeo Padolkar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

ABA 901 OF 2012

¶2

vks

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.901 OF 2012

¶4

Raghunath Namdeo Padolkar

¶5

.. Applicant.

¶6

V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra

¶8

.. Respondent

¶9

Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil, for the Applicant

¶10

Mr. K. P. Kharge, APP for the Respondent - State

¶11

CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J.

¶12

DATE : 15th October, 2012

¶13

P.C.

¶14

The learned counsel for the applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No.85 of 2012, registered with Jath Police Station, District: Sangli, on the allegation that the applicant was party to extract a sum of 6,00,000/- for the purpose of securing a job for the first informant with the assurance that the first informant would get a job on the salary of 25,000/-. The applicant is alleged to have deceived the first informant by offering a job on the salary of only 3,000/- from a society. A sum of 1,00,000/- is according to F.I.R. received by the society. Learned counsel for the applicant states that without prejudice to his client's rights and defences, applicant would deposit a sum of `2,50,000/- with the learned trial Court,

¶15

page 1 of 3

¶16

ABA 901 OF 2012

¶17

within a period of three weeks and another sum of 2,50,000/within a period of six weeks from the date of this order. In view of this though the learned APP has objection, no useful purpose would be served in subjecting the applicant to custodial interrogation. The application is, therefore, allowed. In the event of applicant's arrest in above Crime, the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of 25,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the sum aggregating to `25,000/- on the following conditions :-

¶18

i) The applicant shall deposit with the trial Court a sum of 2,50,000/- within a period of three weeks and balance of 2,50,000/- within a period of six weeks, which amounts the learned trial Judge shall invest in the interest earning depositing schemes, in the State Bank of India, and shall deal with the same at the end of the trial as per result of trial.

¶19

ii) The applicant shall make himself available on 18^th October, 2012 at 10.00 a.m. for interrogation by Investigating Officer and thereafter as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

¶20

iii) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶21

iv) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court.

¶22

page 2 of 3

¶23

ABA 901 OF 2012

¶24

v) The order shall remain in force till the trial is over with the only stipulation that if chargesheeted the applicant may furnish fresh bonds before the trial Court in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre -vsState of Maharashtra and ors, reported in A.I.R. 2011 SC 312.

¶25

vi) Application stands disposed of.

¶26

(R.C.CHAVAN, J.)

¶27

page 3 of 3

Raghunath Namdeo Padolkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghunath Namdeo Padolkar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Raghunath Shenai Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dharmraj Kashiram Pardhi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kavita Manjunath Gosavi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sagar Prakash Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Pramod Nivrutti Osarmal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Raghunath Namdeo Padolkar Vs the State of Maharashtra