Allowed

Maganrao Ramrao Bhalekar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC9 Feb 2012APPLN/264/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants suspected of environmental and corruption offences, noting their trucks were empty. Ruling they were not prima facie guilty, the court ordered them to appear for interrogation in lieu of arrest.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; bail granted on personal bonds and one solvent surety of Rs. 50,000/-; appearance before Investigating Officer directed.

Maganrao Ramrao Bhalekar Vs the State of… — Environment and Pollution | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

Cri.Appl.No.252 of 2012 and others

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.252 OF 2012

¶5

Vinod Kantilal Mugdiya, Age-37 years, Occu-Business, R/o.Kushal Nagar, Jalna Road, Aurangabad APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The State of Maharashtra

¶8

Superintendent of Police, Beed RESPONDENTS

¶9

Mr.N.S.Ghanekar, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.D.R.Kale, learned A.P.P. for respondent/State.

¶10

WITH

¶11

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.264 OF 2012

¶12

Maganrao Ramrao Bhalekar, Age-45 years, Occu-Agriculturist, R/o.Nipani, Tq. And Dist.Aurangabad

¶13

APPLICANT

¶14

VERSUS

¶15

The State of Maharashtra

¶16

Superintendent of Police, Beed

¶17

RESPONDENTS

¶18

Mr.K.N.Lokhande, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.D.R.Kale, learned A.P.P. for respondent/State.

¶19

WITH

¶20

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.265 OF 2012

¶21

Bharat Sudamrao Pawar, Age-35 years, Occu-Agriculturist, R/o.Pachod (Vikod), Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad

¶22

APPLICANT

¶23

2 Cri.Appl.No.252 of 2012 and others

¶24

VERSUS

¶25

The State of Maharashtra 2. District Superintendent of Police, Beed, Dist.Beed RESPONDENTS Mr.K.N.Lokhande, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.D.R.Kale, learned A.P.P. for respondent/State.

¶26

WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.277 OF 2012
1. Babasaheb Shankar Shinde, Age-53 years, Occu-Agriculturist and Business, R/o.Zalta, Tq.Aurangabad, Dist.Aurangabad
2. Badri Yadhavrao Shinde, Age-34 years, Occu-Agriculturist and Business, R/o.Zalta, Tq. Aurangabad, Dist.Auranbabad APPLICANTS
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station,
Georai, Tal.Beed,Dist.Beed RESPONDENT
Mr.R.R.Suryawanshi, learned counsel for the applicants. Mr.D.R.Kale, learned A.P.P. for respondent/State.

¶27

(CORAM : A.H.JOSHI, J.)

¶28

DATE : 09/02/2012

¶29

PER COURT :

¶30

Applicants are amongst accused named in Crime No.307/2011, registered in Georai Police Station u/s.259, 465, 467, 468, 471, 473, 379, 420 of IPC r/w. Sections 15 and 19 of Environment Protection Act r/w. Sections 3,4 and 7 of State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act 2005, r/w.

¶31

¶32

Cri.Appl.No.252 of 2012 and others

¶33

Section 48(7), 48(8) of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.

¶34

Applicants herein are the truck owners, whose empty trucks were found on the place of offence mostly waiting to have the sand loaded therein.

¶35

Case of these applicants stands on different footing than the truck owners whose trucks were actually seen loaded with sand from the site and hence they have primafacie actually committed the offence.

¶36

Therefore, it shall suffice if these applicants make themselves available for interrogation to reveal how they have reached the spot and at whose behest etc.

¶37

In this situation, the applicants are entitled for the relief sought for.

¶38

In the event of arrest of applicants, they be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds and one solvent surety each in a sum of Rs. 50,000/-. They shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 14/02/2012, between 3 to 7 p.m., on every alternate day till the Investigation Officer excuses their further appearance.

¶39

khs/FEB.2012/cri.appl.252-12

Maganrao Ramrao Bhalekar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maganrao Ramrao Bhalekar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pushpa Raosaheb Pathare and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Khandu Bapu Pawar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gokul Onkar Patil Vs the State of Mah

Appasaheb Mukund Yeole and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shivaji Babasaheb Jejurkar Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Rajendra Kaduba Gajare Vs the State of Mah and Anr.