Sanjay Babanrao Jadhav and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
The Bombay High Court rejected the applicants' appeal for anticipatory bail in a cheating and criminal conspiracy case involving misappropriation and forgery of bills in a Gram Panchayat fund, holding that custodial interrogation was necessary.
What the court decided
907-ABA-121-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.121 OF 2019
Sanjay Babanrao Jadhav & Anr. … Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra. … Respondent
Mr. Ganesh Gole I/b. Aarif Ali M. Ali for Applicants. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for State. Mr. S. R. Gaikwad, P.N. 1088, Ghoti p.stn. is present.
CORAM :- SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE :- 14th JUNE, 2019
P. C. :-
- The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection
with C.R.No.I 143 of 2018 registered with Ghoti police station, Nasik, under Section 420 r/w. 34 of the IPC.
- The FIR in this case is lodged on 20/10/2018 by Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Igatpuri. It is his case that some inquiry was conducted in respect of alleged misappropriation which had taken place in the funds of Ambewadi Gram Panchayat. It is the case of first informant that on 05/08/2018, Shivram Dhavale
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when forgery and misappropriation are alleged.
Whether custodial interrogation is necessary to unearth the conspiracy and mode of offence.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Sanjay Babanrao Jadhav & Anr.
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra
Coram
SARANG V. KOTWAL
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court