Allowed

Mrudula Kiran Surve v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC7 Dec 2022IA/4184/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge recalled an order cancelling bail and granted fresh bail to the accused after the complainant withdrew her monetary claim and accepted a settlement of Rs. 23,55,474/-. Both interim applications were disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Recall of bail cancellation order; release of applicant/accused on fresh P.R. bond or cash bail of Rs. 15,000; permission to withdraw deposited money.

Mrudula Kiran Surve Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

501-IA-1608-2019.doc

¶2

GRM

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1608 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1495 OF 2018

¶5

KUSUM KULCHANDRA ..APPLICANT/ COMPLAINANT

¶6

VS.

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS

¶8

AND CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4184 OF 2022 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1249 OF 2018

¶9

MRUDULA KIRAN SURVE ..APPLICANT/ ACCUSED

¶10

VS.

¶11

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT

¶12

Mr. Nivesh Navale i/by Mr. S. R. Phanse, Adv. for the applicant in IA/1608/2019. Mr. Kiran Varma i/by R. Sawant & Assoc., Adv. for the applicant in IA/4184/2022. Mr. S. V. Gavand, APP for the Respondent-State.

¶13

CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶14

DATE : DECEMBER 7, 2022.

¶15

P.C. :

¶16

Heard learned Counsels for the respective applicants.

¶17

Interim application is filed by the complainant-Kusum

¶18

Kulchandra for withdrawal of the amount of Rs. 15,00,000/-,

¶19

which has been deposited in this Court along with the

¶20

1/3

¶21

501-IA-1608-2019.doc

¶22

accrued interest, if any, by the applicant/accused-Mrudula Kiran Surve. The complainant and the applicant/accused have settled their disputes. The learned Counsel appearing for applicant/accused has handed over a Demand Draft dated 2^nd December, 2022 of Rs. 23,55,474/- to the learned Counsel for applicant/complainant. The learned Counsel for applicant/complainant has admitted that he has received the Demand Draft. The entire amount of Rs. 23,55,474/- has been paid and it has accordingly been recorded. Even the amount, which is deposited in this Court, has been allowed to be withdrawn, as the applicant/accused has no objection to the complainant withdrawing the amount. The learned Counsel for applicant/complainant has submitted that the applicant/complainant has no grievance left against the applicant/accused.

¶23

The bail granted to the applicant/accused was cancelled for non-compliance of the conditions vide order dated 23^rd July, 2019 passed by this Court in Criminal Application No. 1495 of 2018.

¶24

As now the claim of complainant is satisfied and even the complainant has no objection if the applicant/accused is

¶25

2/3

¶26

501-IA-1608-2019.doc

¶27

released on bail. The aforesaid order cancelling the bail stands recalled. The earlier order granting bail to the applicant/accused stands reviewed.

¶28

Criminal Interim Application No. 1608 of 2019 and Criminal Interim Application No. 4184 of 2022 stand disposed of accordingly.

¶29

The applicant/accused Mrudula Kiran Surve be released on bail on furnishing fresh P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶30

The applicant/accused is permitted to furnish cash bail surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- for a period of 6 (six) weeks in lieu of surety.

¶31

Registry to permit the complainant to withdraw the amount with accrued interest, if any.

¶32

The learned Counsel for the complainant assures that in case an application for quashing is made, the complainant would consent for the quashing, subject to the concerned Court permitting it.

¶33

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶34

3/3

Mrudula Kiran Surve v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrudula Kiran Surve 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

Ravi Balavantrai Mehta Vs Kalpesh Naresh Pandya and Anr.

Ravindra Prabhakar Bedre Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ranjit Laxman Tanpure Vs Intelligence Officer and Anr.

Samir Salim Khan S/O Salim Khan Vs Union of India and Anr.

Rashid Hasan Faras Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sandeep Antya Thakarey Vs the State of Maharashtra