Shri Shekhar Pralhad Salunkhe v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
The applicant, prosecuted under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 for forging a Sale Deed and cheating, sought continuance of anticipatory bail. The Court examined whether custodial interrogation was necessary to verify transactions and locate a third party involved in the alleged fraud.
What did the court decide?
Interim anticipatory bail granted on March 25, 2015, was confirmed; applicant must attend police station every Thursday until charge sheet is filed.
What the court decided
3-aba-405-2015.doc
Vishal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.405 OF 2015
Shekhar Pralhad Salunkhe ... Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Mr. Prashant Patil, for the Applicant. Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for Respondent – State. IO. Mr. S.G. Shinde (PI), Sahakar-Nagar police station, Pune present.
CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: JULY 06, 2015
P.C.:
. The application is moved for pre arrest bail as the
applicant/accused is prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code in C.R. No. 45 of 2015 registered with Sahakar-Nagar police station, Pune.
- It is the case of the prosecution that one Sharda Hucchedi
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be denied due to the need for custodial interrogation to verify the forgery of a Sale Deed and locate a third party.
Whether the alleged fraud in executing a Sale Deed requires pre-arrest bail to be restricted or denied.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Shekhar Pralhad Salunkhe
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra
Coram
Mridula Bhatkar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court