Allowed

Mohd. Zulfikar Nawab Siddique v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Jun 2019ABA/342/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an anticipatory bail application. The High Court allowed the prayer, granting pre-arrest bail on bond conditions, deposit requirements, attendance at police station, non-tampering, and cooperation with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted on executing PR Bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties, depositing Rs. 3,50,000 twice, attending police calls, not tampering, and cooperating with investigation.

Mohd. Zulfikar Nawab Siddique Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ABA 342-19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 342 OF 2019

¶4

Mohd. Zulfikar Nawab Siddique .Applicant

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra .Respondent

¶7

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 422 OF 2019 ( For Intervention ) IN

¶8

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 342 OF 2019

¶9

Mehrunnissa Mumtaj Ali Shaikh .Intervenor

¶10

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

¶11

Mohd. Zulfikar Nawab Siddique .Applicant

¶12

Vs.

¶13

The State of Maharashtra .Respondent

¶14

Mr. Anish A. Desai, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr. A. R. Kapadnis, APP, for the Respondent – State Mr. Prasanna Bhatgare, Advocate, for the Intervenor Mr. Avinash Mande, PI, R. C. F. police station, Mumbai present

¶15

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶16

DATE : 24.06.2019

¶17

P.C.

¶18

. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶19

1 of 4

¶20

ABA 342-19.doc

¶21

By this Application, the Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C. R. No. 15 of 2019 registered with the R. C. F. Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376, 377, 420, 340, 323 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

According to the Complainant, aged 39 years, she was

¶23

in relationship with the Applicant, aged 38 years since 2012. According to the Complainant, they had physical relations, as the Applicant had promised to marry her. Whether or not the relations were consensual or not will be examined and decided by the trial Court. The Complainant has also alleged that the Applicant had taken an amount of Rs. 24,00,000/- from the Complainant on different occasions for purchase of a house and thereafter, had cheated her. It appears that the Applicant had issued cheques drawn in the name of the Complainant. Although learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the cheques were misused by the Applicant, the same is a matter which will be considered by the trial Court in the 138 proceedings, which are filed by the Complainant against the Applicant. Learned counsel

¶24

2 of 4

¶25

ABA 342-19.doc

¶26

for the Applicant on instructions states that the Applicant without

¶27

admitting his liability and without prejudice to his rights & contentions is ready to deposit a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- in the Registry of this Court, within two weeks from today. Statement accepted.

¶28

Considering the peculiar facts of this case, custodial interrogation of the Applicant is not warranted. Accordingly, the Application is allowed and the Applicant is granted pre-arrest bail on the following terms & conditions :-

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

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

¶31

bail, on executing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶32

(ii) The Applicant shall deposit a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- within two weeks from today and the balance sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- within two weeks thereafter in the Registry of this Court;

¶33

(iii) The Applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called for by the investigating officer;

¶34

(iv) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or

¶35

3 of 4

¶36

ABA 342-19.doc

¶37

attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any

¶38

person concerned with the case;

¶39

(v) The Applicant to cooperate with the investigation.

¶40

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

¶41

In view of disposal of the Application, the Intervention

¶42

Application, being Cri. Appln. No. 422 of 2019 does not survive and the same stands disposed of accordingly.

¶43

To be placed on 09.07.2019 for recording compliance

¶44

of the first deposit of Rs. 3,50,000/-. To be placed on the

¶45

Supplementary Board .

¶46

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this

¶47

order.

¶48

(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

¶49

4 of 4

Mohd. Zulfikar Nawab Siddique v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Zulfikar Nawab Siddique 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

Subhash Sitaram Giri Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajkumar Babulal Sharma@Bhola@Mistri Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rashida @ Simran Mohammad Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishal Shiva Hosmani Vs the State of Maharashtra

Abdul Hamid Yusuf Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vivek Kantichand Dhadha Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.