High Court granted anticipatory bail to an applicant apprehending arrest for offences under Sections 384, 385, 452, 506 IPC. Court held no custodial interrogation needed as money recovery was not involved.
Application allowed; release on bail Rs. 25,000 with one or two sureties in the same amount upon arrest.
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-3021-22.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3021 OF 2022
Sandip Thakaji Shingote…Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra...Respondent
Mr. Shailesh Kharat, for the Applicant.
Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP, for the Respondent/State.
CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE : 20TH DECEMBER, 2022.
P.C. :
This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 for anticipatory bail.
2.The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 144
of 2022 registered at Shivajinagar Police Station, for the offences
punishable under Sections 384, 385, 452, 506 read with 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3.I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the
learned APP for the Respondent/State and perused the FIR.
4.According to the complainant, he is Veterinary Doctor and
is having clinic at Shivajinagar, Pune. According to him on
23/08/2022, the present applicant alognwith co-accused came to his
clinic and created ruckus. It is alleged that the co-accused was saying
1/2
A. J. Vallakati
8-ABA-3021-22.doc
to him that due to his wrong treatment, she lost her pet dog and
demanded Rs. 5 Lkahs. According to the complainant, the present
applicant, who is journalist, told him to pay the amount of Rs. 5 Lakhs
to the co-accused or else he would publish misleading information
about him.
5.The allegations of demand of money are attributed to the
co-accused. Nothing is to be recovered at the instance of present
applicant and therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to
release the applicant on anticipatory bail. In the result, the following
order is passed:
O R D E R
A] The Application is allowed.B]In the event of arrest of applicant in C.R. No. 144 of 2022
registered at Shivajinagar Police Station, for the offences
punishable under Sections 384, 385, 452, 506 read with 34
of the Indian Penal Code, he shall be released on bail on
executing P.R. Bond in the sum ofRs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Five Thousand) withone or two sureties in the like
amount.
C] The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when called and shall co-operate in the investigation.[ N.R. BORKAR, J. ]
2/2
A. J. Vallakati
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in apprehension of arrest for offences of cheating, extortion and criminal intimidation.
Whether custodial interrogation is necessary given the nature of allegations against the applicant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sandip Thakaji Shingote
The State of Maharashtra
N.R. Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court