Dismissed

Vikas @ Vijay Moreshwar Bhopi v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Aug 2021ABA/1947/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court rejected an anticipatory bail application. The applicant, alleged owner of a bungalow used for shooting intimate scenes involving aspiring actresses under offences including IPC 292, 293, 420 and IT Act 67, failed the court's test due to the gravity of the offence. The application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application rejected.

Vikas @ Vijay Moreshwar Bhopi Vs the State of Maharashtra — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

13.A BA -1947-2021.doc

¶2

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD MOHAMMAD NAJEEB NAJEEB MOHAMMAD MOHAMMAD QAYYUM QAYYUM Date: 2021.08.24 17:57:20 +0530

¶3

IN TH E H IG H C O U RT O F JU D IC A TU RE A T BO M BA Y C RIM IN A L A PPE LLA TE JU RIS D IC TIO N

¶4

Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1947 / 2021

¶5

****

¶6

Mr. Pramod G okul Kathane, Advocate for the A pplicant.

¶7

Mr. A mit A . Palkar, A PP for S tate.

¶8

****

¶9

Per Court : -

¶10

1.A pprehending the arrest in connection w ith C rime N o. 103/2021
registered w ith Malw ani Police S tation for the offences punishable
under S ection 292, 293, 420 read w ith 34 of the Indian Penal C ode,
1860 read w ith S ection 67 and 67(A ) of Information and Technology

¶11

Act and under S ection 2(G ) of the Indecent Representation of Woman
Prohibition Act 1986, A pplicant seeks pre-arrest bail.

¶12

Najeeb/.. 1/2

¶13

13.A BA -1947-2021.doc

¶14

2.Persons arrested in the subject crime, had promised aspiring
actresses coming from rural S tate, roles in Web S eries. O n the date
of shoot, they w ere asked to undress and shoot intimate scenes. O n
14th February, 2021, the Accused in the crime w ere found indulging
into the shoot of intimate scenes in bunglow allegedly ow ned by the
A pplicant. A pplicant in his statement, recorded on 5th February, 2021
disclosed that one V ijay V ithoba Patil w as ow ner of the bunglow
w hich w as used for shooting; w hereas investigation revealed that the
A pplicant is ow ner of the bunglow . It is so observed in Paragraph N o.
5 of the order passed by the learned S essions C ourt. In
consideration of the gravity of offence, I am not inclined to grant the
anticipatory bail. A pplication is rejected.

¶15

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

¶16

Najeeb/.. 2/2

Vikas @ Vijay Moreshwar Bhopi v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas @ Vijay Moreshwar Bhopi 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

Chandraprakash Shaligram Atote Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Kumar Swami Cheluvaiya Hegde Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nikhil Raju Chhari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Maruti Navnath Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Abhay Mithilesh Dubey and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kalpak Prakash Malankar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.