Allowed

Uday Kantilal Desai and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Mar 2024ABA/946/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by the appellants facing charges under Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC. The court held that since investigation is complete and custodial interrogation is no longer necessary, the interim bail granted earlier stands confirmed.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted on 19 April 2021 confirmed; anticipatory bail application allowed.

Uday Kantilal Desai and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Neeta Sawant 15-ABA-946-2021.docx

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 946 OF 2021

¶5

Uday Kantilal Desai and anr.

¶6

...APPLICANT

¶7

V/S.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra...RESPONDENT

¶9

Mr. Maroof Khan for the Applicant.

¶10

Mr. Maitreya Girish Shukla for the Intervenor-Original
Complainant.

¶11

Mr. A.S. Gawai, APP for State.

¶12

CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
Dated : 4 March 2024.

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

1)This is an application for anticipatory bail under the provisions of
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in C.R. No. 353 of 2020
registered with Navghar Police Station for the offences punishable
under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

It appears that the investigations into the crime are already complete and chargsheet has already been filed. In that view of the matter, custodial interrogation of the Applicants would not be

¶16

Page No. 1 of 2
4 March 2024

¶17

Neeta Sawant 15-ABA-946-2021.docx

¶18

necessary. The learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants submits
that in pursuance of various Orders passed by this Court from time to
time, the Applicants have paid to the Complainant an amount of Rs.48
lakhs by now. The learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2
would dispute this position and submits that an amount of Rs.6 lakhs is
still not paid by the Applicants. Be that as it may, since the custodial
interrogation of the Applicants is no longer required in the light of
completion of investigation, in my view, the present Application must
be allowed. Accordingly, the interim relief granted by this Court on 19
April 2021 shall stand confirmed. Applicants to co-operate with the
Trial Court for expeditious completion of trial.

¶19

3) The Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶20

NEETA SHAILESH SAWANT

¶21

Digitally signed by SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. NEETA SHAILESH SAWANT Date: 2024.03.05 11:38:19 +0530

¶22

Page No. 2 of 2
4 March 2024

Uday Kantilal Desai and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uday Kantilal Desai and Anr. 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

Priya Sameer Holkar Vs the Deputy Collector (Gad), Mumbai City, Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Balkrishna Dnyanu Gaikwad Since Deceased Thr. Lrs. Chandrakant Balkrishna Gaikwad and Ors. Vs Babu Dnyanu Gaikwad Since Deceased Thr. Lrs. Shantabai Baburao Gaikwad and Ors.

Hemant Devba Sula and Ors. Vs Dhula Hari Sul Deceased Thr Lhrs Ramchandra Dhula Sul and Ors.

Bandongari Telugu Samaj Sra Chs through Chief Promoter Arjun Ramji Gupta vs Alalmgir Ali Mohammad Malkani

Sanjivani Jayesh Seernani vs Kavita Shyam Seernani

Mangesh Aabasaheb Mandhare vs the Deputy Collector (Enc and Rem )and Competent Authority