Allowed

Aruna Pranochyar Katare v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC11 Jul 2019ABA/174/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, allowing pre-arrest bail on the security of Rs. 20,000 with one or two local sureties. The bail was granted solely on the basis of the parties' amicable settlement regarding the underlying dispute.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail (pre-arrest) on security of Rs. 20,000 with one or two local sureties, conditioned on the settlement terms.

Aruna Pranochyar Katare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ABA 174-19.doc

¶2

Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 174 OF 2019

¶4

Aruna Pranochyar Katare .Applicant

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra & anr. .Respondents

¶7

Mr. S. G. Rajput, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr. S. V. Gavand, APP, for the Respondent No. 1 – State Mr. Jayesh K. Rathod, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 2

¶8

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 11.07.2019

¶9

P.C.

¶10

. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

By this Application, the Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C. R. No. 383 of 2018 registered with the MIDC Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the

¶13

Applicant has amicably settled her dispute with the Respondent No. 2. Learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2 i. e. the original Complainant

¶14

1 of 3

¶15

ABA 174-19.doc

¶16

has filed an Affidavit of the Respondent No. 2 stating that the dispute has been amicably settled. In para 3 of the said Affidavit, it is stated that the parties have entered into an Memorandum of Understanding and that the Applicant has promised to repay the Respondent No. 2 the entire consideration of Rs. 22,00,000/- within one year i. e. on or before 2020. It is also stated that in case, the Applicant is unable to pay the total amount or even partial amount within the said period or there is non-compliance of the aforesaid M.O.U., the Applicant will be at liberty to initiate the proceedings against him. In the said Affidavit, it is stated that the Applicant has paid her a sum of Rs. 25,000/- by cheque and has given 11 post dated cheques of Rs. 2,00,000/- each. In addition, one room i. e. ( 1 + 1 ) is handed over. It appears that possession of one room has been given till the entire amount is repaid by the Applicant to the Complainant. It is agreed, on receiving the entire amount of Rs. 22,00,000/-, the Respondent No. 2 will handover possession of that room back to the Applicant.

¶17

Without going into the merits, considering that the parties have amicably settled their dispute, the Application is allowed and the Applicant is granted pre-arrest bail on the following terms & conditions :-

2 of 3

ABA 174-19.doc

O R D E R

(i) In the event of arrest, the Applicant be enlarged on bail, on

¶22

executing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount;

¶23

(ii) If there is breach of any of the conditions of the M.O.U., it

¶24

is open for the Respondent No. 2 to seek cancellation of the Applicant's bail.

¶25

The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

It is made clear, that this Application has not been heard on

¶27

merits and that pre-arrest bail is granted only in view of the settlement between the parties.

¶28

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶29

(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

¶30

3 of 3

Aruna Pranochyar Katare v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aruna Pranochyar Katare v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Amir @ Arbaaz Aslam Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Radhika Krishna Bhandari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Chhotelal Lalbacchan Sahani Vs the State of Maharashtra

Siraj Ahmed Riyaz Ahmed Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashwin Gajanan Tarphe Vs the State of Maharashtra

Aniket Alias Arunkumar Avdhesh Soni Vs the State of Maharashtra