Allowed

Amar Ashok Dhivar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC7 Sept 2021ABA/1829/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR registered for offences under IPC and MOFA Act. The court held that since the transaction was cancelled, consideration refunded, and no new grievances emerged, custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; interim order confirmed; applicant released on bail on executing PR Bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in like amount; directions for appearance before investiga

Amar Ashok Dhivar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

rpa 1 / 4 36 aba 1829 2019.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1829 OF 2019

¶4

Amar Ashok Dhivar .. Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶5

…... Mr.Aniket Nikam a/w. Mr.Ashish Satpute, Mr.Amit Icham i/b.Mr.Piyush Toshnival, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶6

Mr.R.M. Pethe, APP for the Respondent – State.

¶7

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

¶8

DATED : SEPTEMBER 7, 2021.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

Digitally signed by RAJESHRI RAJESHRI PRAKASH PRAKASH AHER AHER Date: 2021.09.09 18:26:17 +0530

¶11

This is an application for anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No.204 of 2019, registered with Sinhagad Road Police Station, Pune City, for the ofences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 467, 471, 474 of Indian Penal Code (“IPC”, for short) and Sections 13(1)(2), 12(A)(6)(7) of The Maharashtra Ownership of Flat (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer Act, 1963 (“MOFA Act”, for short).

¶12

2 The complaint was lodged on 4^th March, 2019. The grievance of the complainant in nutshell is that in November

¶13

rpa 2 / 4 36 aba 1829 2019.doc

¶14

2010, he saw the advertisement about the sale of fats. He approached the builder. He was shown a fat. The agreement was executed for purchase of fat. The consideration of Rs.6,00,000/was paid. Subsequently, he noticed that the requisite permissions were not obtained. The accused have relied upon the fabricated documents. The promise was not fulflled.

¶15

3 Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that pursuant to registration of FIR, deed of cancellation of agreement was executed with the complainant and the said document was cancelled. The entire consideration was refunded to the complainant. Apparently, he has no grievance. It seems that no other aggrieved person is involved in the complaint related to transaction executed by complainant with the applicant.

¶16

4 Learned APP, however, submitted that from the tenor of FIR, it is apparent that the requisite permissions were not obtained. The documents which were purportedly shown to the complainant were fabricated. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary.

¶17

5 It is apparent that the complainant was aggrieved with the transaction which was executed with the applicant. No other person had come forward. Except the allegations refected

¶18

rpa 3 / 4 36 aba 1829 2019.doc

¶19

in the FIR, there is nothing on record to indicate that the allegations made in the complaint, are true. The transaction executed with the complainant has been cancelled. The applicant was granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 21^st August, 2019. The interim protection is still in operation. The case relates to documents and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant need not be subjected to custodial interrogation.

¶20

:: O R D E R ::

¶21

(i) Anticipatory Bail Application No.1829 of 2019, is allowed;

¶22

(ii) Interim order dated 21^st August, 2019, is confrmed;

¶23

(iii) In the event of arrest of applicant in connection with C.R.No.204 of 2019, registered with Sinhagad Road Police Station, Pune City, the applicant be released on bail on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount;

¶24

rpa 4 / 4 36 aba 1829 2019.doc

¶25

(iv) Applicant shall appear before the investigating oficer on 15^th , 16^th and 17^th September, 2021 between 11:00 a.m. to 01:00 p.m. and, thereafter, as and when called for, till charge– sheet;

¶26

(v) Anticipatory Bail Application No.1829 of 2019, stands disposed of accordingly.

¶27

( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Amar Ashok Dhivar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Ashok Dhivar 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

Satish Digambar Dehere Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vatan Shivaji Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rahul Devram Gouterna Vs the State of Maharashtra

Farhana Sajid Patel Vs Abedaben Yunus Patel and Ors.

Sudhir Krishna Gamare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sudhir Krishna Gamare Vs the State of Maharashtra