Dismissed

Glynis M. Sequeira v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC3 Feb 2023APPLN/59/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

By Criminal Application, the applicant challenged the trial Court's bail order for the accused, contending that the accused cheated her and her parents. The High Court rejected the application, finding no error in the trial Court's discretion as the investigation was complete and no serious specific allegations were made against the accused. The High Court stated that keeping the accused in custod

What the court decided

AI extract

Glynis M. Sequeira Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

Diksha Rane 30. APPLN 59-22.doc

¶2

Digitally signed by DIKSHA DIKSHA DINESH DINESH RANE RANE Date: 2023.02.03 16:45:41 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.59/2022

¶5

GLYNIS M.SEQUEIRA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ..RESPONDENTS

¶6

Adv. Vaibhav V. Ugle for the applicant. Mr. S. V. Gavand, APP for State.

¶7

------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶8

DATE : FEBRUARY 3, 2023.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.

¶11

2. Learned counsel for the applicant/complainant submitted that the applicant/complainant had parted with huge amount of money. Even her parents savings were paid to the accused. It is submitted that the accused-Amit Bharat Shah played active part in the commission of the offence and cheated the applicant. Learned counsel further submitted that the trial Court committed an error in releasing the accused -Amit Bharat Shah on bail without even imposing any conditions.

¶12

1/2

¶13

Diksha Rane 30. APPLN 59-22.doc

¶14

3. I have gone through the order passed by the trial Court. I do not find any error in the exercise of the discretion as according to the trial Court the main accused is the brother of the present respondent-Amit Bharat Shah. It is further noted that there are no serious allegations made against the accused-Amit Shah in the commission of the alleged crime. It is further noted that the investigation relating to the accused-Amit Bharat Shah is completed, no purpose will be served by keeping the accused-Amit Bharat Shah behind the bar for more period. The accused will, undoubtedly, face the consequences post trial if the offence against him is proved. I do not see any reason to interfere in the exercise of the discretion by the trial Court while granting bail to the accused-Amit Bharat Shah.

¶15

4. The observations made by learned trial Court obviously are limited for the bail and the same shall not influence the learned trial Court during trial.

¶16

5. The application is rejected and disposed of accordingly.

¶17

2/2

Glynis M. Sequeira v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Glynis M. Sequeira v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangita Rahul Awasare Vs State of Maharashtra

Vishal Vyankat Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anant Balwant Malwankar Vs State of Maharashtra

Damodar Mahadu Bandal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Khelan Bhupesh Parmar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sujit Suresh Bhoir Vs State of Maharashtra