Two applicants sought anticipatory bail in a private criminal complaint. The High Court granted bail citing a settlement agreement between the parties and the admission that custodial interrogation would not aid the prosecution.
Grant of pre-arrest bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 631 of 2020.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
8-ABA-171-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANT. BAIL APPLICATION NO.171 OF 2021 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.729 OF 2021
Archana Anil Kumar Rao … Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents
WITH ANT. BAIL APPLICATION NO.176 OF 2021 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.732 OF 2021
Pramod Kumar Raj Kumar Singh @ Mandal ...Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr. Prathamesh Gaikwad for the Applicants. Mr. H.J.Dedhia, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Hitesh Shah for Intervenor in Interim Applications.
CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J. DATE : 11 th AUGUST, 2021.
P.C. :
Shivgan 1/4
8-ABA-171-2021.odt
Applicants are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with the Crime No.631 of 2020 registered with Aarey Police Station for the ofences punishable under Sections 408, 409, 420, 465, 468, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
2 Applicants and the complainant are near relatives. Complainant-Rajkumar Anilkumar Rao is a director of Minthunt Advisory Private Ltd. Applicant- Pramod Kumar Singh is brother-in-law of Rajkumar; whereas applicantArchana is wife of Pramod Kumar.
3 Complainant and the applicants have settled the disputes and arrived at amicable settlement. Terms of the settlement are reduced into writing dated 11 th August, 2021. It is taken on record and marked ‘X-1’ for Identif i cation. The complainant admits the terms of the
Shivgan 2/4
8-ABA-171-2021.odt
settlement. In terms of the settlement, in my view, custodial interrogation of the applicants shall not further the prosecution case.
4 For the reasons stated above, applications are granted. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(i) In the event of arrest of the applicants in Crime No.631 of 2020 registered with Aarey Police Station, they shall be released on executing PR bond for the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or more sureties in like sum.
(ii) The applicants shall join the investigation as and when called.
5 The applications and interim applications therein
are disposed of .
Shivgan 3/4
8-ABA-171-2021.odt
6 It is made clear that observations made here-in-
above be construed as expression of opinion for the purpose of bail only and the same shall not in any way inf l uence the trial in other proceedings.
(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)
Shivgan 4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted in a private complaint case involving cyber offences and fraudulent activities.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Archana Anil Kumar Rao
Pramod Kumar Raj Kumar Singh
State of Maharashtra
Vijay K. Ladda
Sandeep K. Shinde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
