Dattatray Ankush Machale v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
In this anticipatory bail application, the court considered allegations of forgery and cheating under IPC sections 420, 465, and 468 concerning a fraudulent land measurement document. The application was rejected.
What did the court decide?
The application for anticipatory bail was rejected; the applicant needs no bail today as the evidence was found to be sufficient.
What the court decided
1/4 28 ABA(st)-3737.20.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Manali P. Tilak
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION (ST.) NO.3737 OF 2020
Digitally signed by Manali P. Tilak Date: 2020.11.05 19:27:18 +0530
.. Dattatray Ankush Machale Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
Mr.Aniket Nikam i/b Nihal M. Mansuri for the Applicant. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad, A.P.P. for the State.
CORAM: SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED :04TH NOVEMBER, 2020.
P.C:-
1 The applicant is apprehending arrest in C.R. No.588 of 2020 registered with Saswad Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 of IPC.
The C.R has been registered on a complaint filed by one Dattatraya Zurunge who is involved in construction activity and is a resident of Munjawadi, District Pune. He carries on the construction activity in partnership with one Nilesh Jagtap and the construction activity is run in the name of Shiv Shambo Builders and Developers, which involve
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving forgery of land measurement documents and cheating.
Whether custodial interrogation is necessary to investigate allegations of forgery in a construction-related dispute.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Dattatray Ankush Machale
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra
Coram
Bharati Dangre
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court