Allowed

Manisha Balwant Shipugade v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC23 Sept 2014BA/2085/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by a public servant accused of demanding and accepting a bribe. The investigation into the trap case was concluded. The court granted bail on conditions including furnishing a bond, not tampering with evidence, and reporting address changes.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing surety bond of Rs. 30,000 with two sureties in equal amount, complying with standard bail conditions.

Manisha Balwant Shipugade Vs the State of Maharashtra — Corruption | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

Sherla V.

¶2

ba.2085.2014.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.2085 OF 2014

¶5

Manisha Balwant Shipugade ... Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent

¶8

Mr.Lokesh Zade i/b Khandeprkar & Asso. for the Applicant Mr.S.H. Yadav, APP, for Respondent – State

¶9

CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

¶10

DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 2014

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

Not on Board. Upon mentioning, taken on Board.

¶13

The application is moved for bail as the applicant/accused is facing charges under sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The applicant/accused, who is a public servant, working as Talathi at village Vibhawane, Taluka Kudal, District Sindhudurg had demanded a bribe of Rs.700 and then agreed to accept Rs.400/-. She was caught red handed in the trap laid by the Anti Corruption Bureau. Thus, since 16.9.2014, she is taken into custody.

¶14

The learned Counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that the applicant/accused is taken into custody and all investigations are over. The learned Counsel submitted that this is a trap case and considering the amount of bribe, she be released on bail.

¶15

1 / 2

¶16

ba.2085.2014.doc

¶17

Learned Prosecutor has opposed the application and submitted that she was caught under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

¶18

This is a trap case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, wherein after arrest of the accused, the investigation on all material counts gets over and there is no question of tampering of evidence of the applicant/accused. The applicant/accused is inside the prison since one week.

¶19

In view of this, the application is allowed on the following terms:

¶20

i) The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶21

ii) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and shall not indulge into any criminal activity while on bail;

¶22

iii) In the event the applicant changes her residence, she shall communicate the new address to the concerned police station with documentary proof.

¶23

Criminal Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶24

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶25

2 / 2

Manisha Balwant Shipugade v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manisha Balwant Shipugade 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

Rakhmaji Parmeshawr Mahadik and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Atul Kinchik Bagal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Samadhan Mahadeo Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amar Tanaji Lokhande Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kumar Dattatraya Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishnu Digambar Shinde (Patil) Vs the State of Maharashtra