Allowed

Firdos Irfan Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC27 Jun 2023ABA/622/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bench allowed an anticipatory bail application and confirmed interim bail granted previously. The court noted the applicant had lodged an undertaking-cum-affidavit to repay the cheated amount and confirmed that the entire amount had been paid to the complainant.

What did the court decide?

The interim bail granted vide order dated 08/03/2021 is confirmed; both the anticipatory bail and interim bail applications are disposed of.

Firdos Irfan Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

30_aba_622_2021.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.622 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1093 OF 2021
IN

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.622 OF 2021

¶5

Firdos Irfan Shaikh

¶6

...Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra...Respondent

¶9

Mr. Gaurav Bhawnani for the Applicant.
None for the Intervenor.
Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP for the Respondent-State.

¶10

CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

¶11

DATED: 27th JUNE, 2023.

¶12

P. C. :-

¶13

1.The Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in C.R. No.95 of 2021
registered with Dharavi Police Station, Mumbai, for the offences
punishable under Sections 406, 420, 504 and 506 r/w 34 of the IPC.

¶14

2.The aforesaid crime was registered pursuant to the FIR
lodged by Mohd. Yusuf Shaikh. The facts narrated in the FIR prima
facie reveal that the Applicant had entered into leave and license
agreement with the First Informant. The Applicant had received an
amount of Rs.6,00,000/- towards deposit. It is stated that the

Megha

1/2

30_aba_622_2021.odt

Applicant did not part with the property and there by cheated the First
Informant. The Applicant herein had filed an affidavit -cum-
undertaking to repay the amount to the First Informant as per the
schedule mentioned in paragraph 5 of the said affidavit.

¶19

3.Learned counsel for the Applicant states that the entire
amount as per the said schedule has been paid to the First Informant
and that the parties will file necessary application to compound the
offence or to quash the FIR. Learned APP confirms the statement that

¶20

the Applicant has paid to the Complainant the entire amount as per the
schedule.

¶21

4.It is also to be noted that the Applicant was granted interim
bail on 08/03/2021. It is stated that the Applicant has cooperated
with the investigation and that the charge-sheet has been filed.

¶22

5.Considering the above facts and circumstances, interim bail

¶23

granted vide order dated 08/03/2021 stands confirmed.

¶24

6.The Anticipatory Bail Application as well as the interim
application stands disposed of.

¶25

 (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

¶26

Megha

¶27

2/2

Firdos Irfan Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Firdos Irfan Shaikh 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

Mahadev Appasaheb Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shraddha Yuvraj Takawane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nikesh Prakash Takawane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jyoti Sukhram Verma Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amaro Mohammad Sharif Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rashmin T. Rughani Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.