Disposed

Nitesh Nihalani v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC5 Oct 2021IA/430/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court considered interim bail applications where applicants deposited amounts to show bonafide for recovery of alleged defalcation. The judge waived the condition to attend the Investigating Officer and confirmed the bail, placing on record that breach of terms would lead to immediate vacating of bail.

What did the court decide?

The condition to attend the Investigating Officer is waived; interim applications disposed off; bail allowed subject to payment conditions.

Nitesh Nihalani Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

Osk

¶2

 29-Aba-1973-2019.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1973 OF 2019

¶6

Milind Vinayak Patil… Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra… Respondent

¶7

WITH

¶8

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 430 OF 2019 IN

¶9

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1973 OF 2019

¶10

Nitesh Nihalani… Intervenor
In the matter between :-
Milind Vinayak Patil… Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra… Respondent

¶11

WITH CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1974 OF 2019

¶12

Pramila Negi Simmy… Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra… Respondent

¶13

WITH

¶14

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 431 OF 2019 IN

¶15

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1974 OF 2019

¶16

Nitesh Nihalani… Intervenor
In the matter between :-
Pramila Negi Simmy… Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra… Respondent

¶17

1/3

¶18

 29-Aba-1973-2019.odt

¶19

Osk

¶20

Mr.Aditya Gore for Applicants in both matters.
Ms.Kamini Pansare i/b. V.M.Legal for Intervenor.
Mr.Y.M. Nakhwa, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.

¶21

Mr.Sharad R. Nimale, P.S.I., M.I.D.C. Police Station, Andheri, Mumbai.

¶22

CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J.
DATE : 5th October 2021.

¶23

P.C. :

¶24

1.Mr.Gore, learned counsel appearing for the Applicants submitted
that, in pursuance of Affidavit-cum-Undertaking dated 6th September 2021
filed by the Applicants, the Applicants have deposited first installment, more
specifically mentioned in table given in para No.2 of the said Affidavit, in the
Registry of this Court within stipulated period. He further on instructions
submitted that, the Applicant will adhere to the undertakings given by them
and will deposit balance installments within stipulated period mentioned in
the said Affidavit and recorded in Order dated 18th September 2021. The said
statement is accepted.

¶25

2.Investigating Agency is seeking custody of the Applicants
predominantly for recovery of the said amount allegedly defalcated by the
Applicants.

¶26

In view of the fact that, the Applicants are showing their bonafide
by depositing the said amount, this Court is of the considered view that, the
custodial interrogation of the Applicants for further investigation of the

¶27

2/3

¶28

Osk 29-Aba-1973-2019.odt

¶29

present crime is not necessary and they can be protected by pre-arrest bail.

¶30

3.Interim relief, granted by Order dated 9th September 2019 is
hereby confirmed. However, the condition to attend the Investigating Officer
is waived.

¶31

4.It is however made clear that, if the Applicants commits default in
making payment in depositing the said amount in the Registry of this Court,
as mentioned in the said Affidavit dated 6th September 2021, the Order
granting pre-arrest bail to the Applicants shall stand immediately vacated. In
that event, the Investigating Agency will be at liberty to arrest the Applicants.

¶32

5.Both the Anticipatory Bail Applications are allowed in the
aforesaid terms.

¶33

6.In view of disposal of Anticipatory Bail Applications, Interim
Application Nos.430 of 2019 and 431 of 2019 do not survive and are
accordingly disposed off.

¶34

[A.S. GADKARI, J.]

¶35

Digitally signed by OMKAR OMKAR SHIVAHAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN KUMBHAKARN Date: 2021.10.06 10:19:58 +0530

¶36

3/3

Nitesh Nihalani v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitesh Nihalani 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Naseema W/O. Shoib Kasmani Vs Shri. Yusuf E. Khan (Deleted Since Decd) Thru Lhrs

Smt.Bharti Sanjay Bhansali Vs Uttar Bhartiya Public Charitable Trust and Ors.

Techno Aid Engineers Thru Partners Vs Smt. Surekha Jagandar Shah and Ors.

Shree Rajendra Ram Janki Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra Thru Gp and Anr.

Dashrath Machindra Kokare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Manoj Ompal Gagat Vs the Municipal Corporation of Grater Mumbai