Allowed

Ranjeetkumar Viren and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC14 Jun 2018ABA/186/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court confirmed interim anticipatory bail granted on 31st January 2018, waiving the condition to attend the Investigating Officer. The relief was based on findings that witnesses were relatives of the informant and property was recovered by a co-accused during custodial interrogation, rendering further custodial interrogation unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application allowed; interim relief confirmed; condition to appear before Investigating Officer waived.

Ranjeetkumar Viren and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

10-ABA186-18.DOC

¶2

Santosh

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 186 OF 2018

¶4

Ranjeetkumar Viren & Anr ...Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondent

¶5

Mr. Samir Vaidya, a/w Mr. Abhilesh Chitre, Mr. Kuldeep Khamare, for the Applicants.

¶6

Mr. S. S. Hulke, APP for the State/Respondent. Mr. Avdhut Wadikar, PSI, Aarey Police Station, Mumbai.

¶7

CORAM: A. S. GADKARI, J DATED: 14th JUNE, 2018

¶8

PC:-

¶9

1. By a reasoned Order dated 31^st January, 2018, the applicant was granted interim relief.

¶10

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP. Perused the record of investigation.

¶11

2. The record indicates that the witnesses who assert

¶12

that the applicant has stolen the said instruments mentioned in the FIR are close relatives of the first informant and are supporting his case. The role of the applicants is revealed during the interrogation of co-

¶13

1/2

¶14

10-ABA186-18.DOC

¶15

accused and certain property involved in the crime has been recovered at the instance of co-accused Periyaswami. In view thereof, the custodial interrogation of the applicants for further investigation of the present crime is not necessary.

¶16

3. Interim relief granted by Order dated 31^st January, 2018 is hereby confirmed. However, the condition to attend the Investigating Officer of concerned police station is waived.

¶17

4. Application is allowed in aforesaid terms.

¶18

2/2

Ranjeetkumar Viren and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeetkumar Viren and Anr. 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

Riyaz Abdul Rashid Nagpurwala Vs the State of Maharashtra

Azimuddin Bismillah Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Harish Ratilal Vaghadia Vs the State of Maharashtra

Wasim Anwar Pardeshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Faisallunisa Zafar Ahmad Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Selapandi Subramaniam Nadar Vs the State of Maharashtra