Allowed

Rajendra Devichand Dhoka v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC15 Nov 2014ABA/1146/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail to three applicants, who are relatives of the accused in a cheque dishonour FIR. The court observed that the applicants received no money, the investigation concluded, and no evidence existed against them, leading to the confirmation of earlier interim orders.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; interim orders passed on 03/09/2014, 10/09/2014, and 11/09/2014 confirmed.

Rajendra Devichand Dhoka Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2014)

-: 1 :-

901.ABA.1146.14

ingale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1146 OF 2014

¶7

Rajendra Devichand Dhoka .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶8

WITH

¶9

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1182 OF 2014

¶10

Dr.Lalitkumar Devichand Dhoka .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶11

WITH

¶12

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1183 OF 2014

¶13

Ankur Sanjay Dhoka Vs.	.. Applicant
The State of Maharashtra	.. Respondent

¶14

Mr.Niranjan Mundargi a/w Mr.Vikram R.Sutaria, Advocate for the Applicants. Ms.S.S.Kaushik, APP, for Respondent-State. Mr.Amol Subhash Gavali, PSI- MIDC Bhosari Police Station, Pune is present.

¶15

CORAM : ABHAY M.THIPSAY, J. DATE : 15^th November, 2014

¶16

P.C. :

¶17

. These three applications for anticipatory bail can be conveniently disposed of by this common order as all the three applicants are apprehending arrest in one and the same C.R., and the contentions advanced by them are similar.

¶18

901.ABA.1146.14

¶19

-: 2 :-

¶20

I have heard Mr.Niranjan Mundargi, the learned Counsel for the applicants. I have heard Ms.S.S.Kaushik, learned APP for the State. I have gone through the papers of investigation, that have been produced by the investigating officer.

¶21

It is evident that the First Informant and others have paid the amounts to the co-accused – Sanjay Devichand Dhoka and not to any of the present applicants. The applicants- Rajendra Dhoka and Dr.Lalitkumar Devichand Dhoka (Anticipatory Bail Applications No.1146 of 2014 and 1182 of 2014, respectively) are the brothers of the said Sanjay. The applicant- Ankur Sanjay Dhoka (Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1183 of 2014) is the son of Sanjay. It is not in dispute that the amount was received by Sanjay and that Sanjay purported to repay the said amount to the persons from whom he had received the same, by issuing cheques to them. It is a different matter that the cheques bounced, but it is nobody's case that any of the applicants had received any amount, or had accepted the liability and/or attempted to repay the amounts.

¶22

Sanjay was arrested on 21/08/2014 and released on bail by the learned Magistrate, by order dated 30/08/2014. His wife, coaccused-Sharda was also arrested and released on bail by the learned Magistrate. The applicants are protected by an interim order of anticipatory bail right since from September 2014. It is not in dispute that they have attended the police station and have been interrogated.

¶23

901.ABA.1146.14

¶24

-: 3 :-

¶25

The applicants have been arrested and released on bail pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court. The investigation appears to be over. No amount allegedly received by Sanjay from the First Informant and other victims could be traced in the accounts of any of the applicants, in the course of investigation. As a matter of fact, that does not appear to be the case at all of the investigating agency.

¶26

Under the circumstances, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants.

¶27

Operative Order in Anticipatory Bail Application No.1146 of 2014

¶28

i) The application is allowed.

¶29

ii) The interim order passed on 03/09/2014 is confirmed.

¶30

iii) The application is disposed of in terms of the said order.

¶31

Operative Order in Anticipatory Bail Application No.1182 of 2014

¶32

i) The application is allowed.

¶33

ii) The interim order passed on 10/09/2014 is confirmed.

¶34

iii) The application is disposed of in terms of the said order.

¶35

Operative Order in Anticipatory Bail Application No.1183 of 2014

¶36

i) The application is allowed.

¶37

ii) The interim order passed on 11/09/2014 is confirmed.

¶38

iii) The application is disposed of in terms of the said order.

¶39

(ABHAY M.THIPSAY, J.)

Rajendra Devichand Dhoka v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Devichand Dhoka 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aarti Company Registered Partnership Firm, Partner Shrivallabh Radhkisan Karwa Vs Ismail Husen Shaikh and Anr.

Balam @ Ankush Anil Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ajit Hariram Lakhani Vs Rani Mohanlal Shahani and Anr.

Nilesh Mahendra Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sagar Suresh Bhambid Vs the State of Maharashtra

Hiren Shantilal Kothari and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.