Allowed

Sandeep Arjun Kudale v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC21 Dec 2022ABA/3546/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed a petition for anticipatory bail, holding that despite a three-day delay in lodging the FIR, the prima facie allegations under Sections 353 and 34 IPC did not constitute an offence warranting arrest.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant directed to release on anticipatory bail on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 25,000 with one or two sureties and to attend the police station.

Sandeep Arjun Kudale Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

908-ABA-3546-22.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3546 OF 2022 Sandeep Arjun Kudale …Applicant

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Maharashtra …Respondent

¶5

Mr. Subodh Desai a/w Mr. Adwait Bhonde i/b Mr. Lokesh Zade for the Applicant.

¶6

Ms Veera Shinde, APP for the State.

¶7

Mr. Basvaraj M., Kothrud Police Station, Pune City, present.

¶8

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 21 DECEMBER 2022

¶9

P.C. :-

¶10

This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for anticipatory bail.

¶11

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 292 of 2022 registered at Kothrud police station for the offences punishable under Sections 353 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

The alleged incident took place in the intervening night of 9 December 2022 and 10 December 2022. According to the complainant, during the relevant period he was working as a police

MJ Jadhav

1 / 3

908-ABA-3546-22.odt

Head Constable with police Headquarter, Pune and was assigned the duty to guard the residence of Higher and Technical Education Minister, State of Maharashtra, at Kothrud, Pune. It is alleged that at about 12.10 a.m. the complainant found that the present applicant was standing there near the gate of Bungalow and one unidentified woman who was with the applicant, was making video of the Bungalow in her mobile phone. According to the complainant, he repeatedly told the applicant to go away, however, he refused to do so.

¶17

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is a delay in lodging the FIR. It is submitted that even if the case of the prosecution is accepted as it is, still it would not constitute the offence punishable under section 353 of the IPC.

¶18

On the other hand the learned APP submits that considering the nature of offence the applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.

¶19

I have perused the First Information Report. There is a delay of three days in lodging the FIR. Apart from it, prima facie, the allegations would not constitute the offence punishable under Section 353 of the IPC. Considering these facts, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order is passed:

MJ Jadhav

2 / 3

908-ABA-3546-22.odt

(i) Application is allowed.

¶24

(ii) In the event of the arrest of the applicant in Crime No. 292 of 2022 registered at Kothrud police station for the offences punishable under Sections 353 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶25

(iii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called.

¶26

( N.R. BORKAR, J. )

¶27

MJ Jadhav

¶28

3 / 3

Sandeep Arjun Kudale v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Arjun Kudale 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

Rahul Sanjay Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra

Shalan Prakash Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sandip Thakaji Shingote Vs State of Maharashtra

Vishal @ Janglya Sham Satpute Vs State of Maharashtra

Bhupendra Muralidhar More Vs State of Maharashtra

Sanjay Sohan Batunge Vs State of Maharashtra