Rohan Dattatrya Jadhav vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

. After the matter was heard for some time, as of today suffice will be the purpose if certain directions are given to the Investigating Officer (IO). The IO is not present today.

¶19

The victim is granted permission to supply to the police the audio recording regarding the conversation on mobile call between the victim

¶20

1

¶21

Diksha Rane 10. ABA 96-25.doc

¶22

and the accused no.3 Rishikesh Dattatray Jadhav/her husband.

¶23

So also, the victim is permitted to handover the video clip recorded which shows the conversation of the victim with the neighbour.

¶24

Once this information is supplied to the IO, the IO should immediately act as per the provisions of law.

¶25

The applicant should also attend the office of the IO on 25^th February 2025 and 26^th February 2025 between 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. 6. The IO under any circumstances should remain present before this Court on the next date of the hearing. 7. Stand over to 11^th March 2025 . Matter to come up under the caption ‘ Urgent Circulation ’. 8. Interim protection granted earlier to continue till the next date of the hearing.

¶26

2. Today victim’s statement has been showed by the learned APP which records the conversation between the victim and her husband. I have gone through the statement recorded by the police and also gone through the recording of the police of conversation between the victim and her husband. The contents of conversation is a matter of trial.

¶27

3. At a prima facie stage, I am of the view that custody of the present applicant is not necessary. Therefore, the anticipatory bail application stands allowed. Hence, the following order.

¶28

ORDER

¶29

(a) The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶30

(b) In the event of arrest in connection with the First Information

¶31

Report No.490/2024 registered with the Vita Police Station, District Sangli, the applicant shall be released on bail, on furnishing P.R. bond

¶32

2

¶33

Diksha Rane 10. ABA 96-25.doc

¶34

to the extent of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties of the like amount.

¶35

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and shall not tamper with evidence.

¶36

(d) The applicant shall furnish details of his residential address, contact numbers and email address to the Investigating Officer.

¶37

4. The anticipatory bail application is disposed of.

¶38

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

¶39

3

¶40

Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 11/03/2025 18:48:36

Rohan Dattatrya Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohan Dattatrya Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sushma Ravindra Gavhale vs State of Maharashtra

Virendra Narayan Wankhede and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rahul Arun Chavan vs State of Maharashtra

Aafreen Mehmood Shaikh @ Aafreen Samir Khan vs State of Maharashtra

Sultan Sirajuddin Yasin vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Haider Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra