Allowed

Shrikrishna Vasudeo Vhale v. the State of Mah

Bombay HC9 Oct 2012APPLN/3950/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for bail under s. 439 CrPC, the High Court released the applicant arrested for offences under s. 366 and 376 IPC, holding that indefinite detention is not warranted as investigation was nearly complete. Bail granted with bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on execution of P.R. bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties in the amount of Rs. 25,000/- each.

Shrikrishna Vasudeo Vhale Vs the State of Mah — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

Cri.Appl.No.3950 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3950 OF 2012

¶5

Shrikrishna Vasudeo Vhale, Age-28 years, Occu-Business, R/o.Shelgaon (Vhale), Tal. Barshi, Dist.Solapur APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The State of Maharashtra

¶8

RESPONDENT

¶9

Mr.A.R.Devkate, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.D.R.Kale, learned A.P.P. for State.

¶10

(CORAM : M.T.JOSHI, J.)

¶11

DATE : 09/10/2012

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Heard both sides.

¶14

The present applicant, who is arrested in Crime No.253 of 2012 by Tophkhana Police Station for the offences punishable u/s.366, 376 r/w. 34 of IPC, is praying for his release on bail.

¶15

The applicant was arrested on 31/07/2012. The allegations against him are that he has lured the complainant lady through the

¶16

2 Cri.Appl.No.3950 of 2012

¶17

Internet chatting. Thereafter by emotionally blackmailing her, he made her to marry with him by going to the Court premises of Osmanabad and then the marriage was performed in the temple. Thereafter, sexual relations were established and as such the offences as alleged are committed.

¶18

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is behind bar since 31/07/2012. The investigation is complete, false allegations are made against him. Therefore, he be released on bail.

¶19

The learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel assisting the learned APP, however, submit that one of the co-accused is absconding, investigation is to be completed and therefore the applicant may not be released on bail.

¶20

Considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the applicant is behind bar for a period of more than 2 months, and since investigation is almost complete, in my opinion, the applicant can not kept behind bars for an indefinite period, hence the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

¶21

In the circumstances, the applicant Shrikrishna Vasudeo Vhale be released on bail on his execution of P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- and also upon furnishing two sureties in the amount of Rs. 25,000/- each. The applicant shall communicate his permanent

¶22

3 Cri.Appl.No.3950 of 2012

¶23

place of residence as well as mobile no. to the Investigating Officer and thereafter in the Court also as and when the charge sheet would be filed.

¶24

(M.T.JOSHI, J.)

¶25

khs/SEPT 2012/cri.appl.3950-12

Shrikrishna Vasudeo Vhale v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrikrishna Vasudeo Vhale v. the State of Mah

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

Chandrabhan Ragha Agle and Ors. Vs the State of Mah

Dhondiram Narhari Munde Vs the State of Mah

Vaijenath Venkatrao Kaure Vs the State of Mah

Sanjay Motilal Parihar(Lodhi) and Anr. Vs the State of Mah

Kundlik Ghanshyam Kamble Vs the State of Mah

Avchitrao Govindrao Thombre and Anr. Vs the State of Mah