Allowed

Akash Ashok Sawant v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC12 Nov 2014ABA/897/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal anticipatory bail application was filed by an applicant apprehending arrest in a matrimonial dispute case involving multiple offences. The court accepted consent terms of settlement filed by the parties and their undertakings, finding custody unjustified. Consequently, the application was allowed.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was allowed; the applicant is to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs. 15,000 and one or two sureties in like amount.

Akash Ashok Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

3.aba897.14.sxw

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 897 OF 2014

¶5

Akash Ashok Sawant. ... Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents.

¶6

Mr. Rajeev Patil, Sr. Advocate a/w. Mr. Omkar Warange, advocate for Applicant.

¶7

Mr. M.S. Mohite, advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶8

Ms. P.P. Shinde, APP for State.

¶9

CORAM : SMT.SADHANA S. JADHAV,J DATE : NOVEMBER 12, 2014

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1 Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and the learned APP for State. Perused the papers.

¶12

2 This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 68 of 2014 registered at Wada Police Station, Thane for offence punishable under Section 406, 420, 498A, 506(ii) read with Section

Talwalkar

1/3

2 3.aba897.14.sxw

34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66A and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶17

3 The respective Counsel submit that the said criminal prosecution emanates from a matrimonial dispute between the parties. The parties have settled the dispute. Today, Consent Terms are filed on record. The complainant and the applicant are present in the court and have been duly identified by their respective Counsel. The applicant and complainant have filed the Consent Terms on record. The same is taken on record and marked as Article 'X' for the purpose of identification. Both the parties have given an undertaking that they would abide by the Consent Terms. It is stated in paragraph-F of the Consent Terms that the parties would also be filing a petition seeking quashing of the FIR on the basis of the Crime No. 68 of 2014 is registered. The undertakings given by the respective parties are accepted by this Court.

¶18

4 In view of this, custody of the applicant is unwarranted and unjustified. Therefore, this Court is inclined to allow the application

Talwalkar

2/3

3 3.aba897.14.sxw

under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Hence the following order :

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(i) The application is allowed.

¶25

(ii) In the event of arrest, the applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- and one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶26

5 The Application is disposed of on the above terms.

¶27

Talwalkar

¶28

3/3

Akash Ashok Sawant v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Ashok Sawant 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

The State of Maharashtra Vs Mahadeo Govind Jadhav and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Mahadeo Govind Jadhav and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Rahul Ramdas Yeole and Ors.

Mohammad Akhil Qureshi @ Vakil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohd Maqbool Mohd Shoib Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mohan Ramesh Kandal and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra