ABA-564.2012 v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
Key paragraphs
- Para 11. This is an application for anticipatory bail by a person who, even according to the FIR, was present along with seven other accused persons when the first informant was assaulted and cash and ornaments were snatched from him. The report about this incident dated…
Judgment
Shri Ganesh Gole for the Applicant. Smt. S.V. Sonawane, APP, for the State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: JUNE 26, 2012 P.C:
#1. This is an application for anticipatory bail by a person who, even according to the FIR, was present along with seven other accused persons when the first informant was assaulted and cash and ornaments were snatched from him. The report about this incident dated 9-5-2012 has to be read in the context of the complaint made by the applicant before the learned Magistrate on 12-4-2012 against the first informant. Considering the fact that except for presence along with some other accused persons, no role is attributed to the applicant in either inflicting any injury ABA-564.2012 on the first informant or snatching his cash or valuables, it is not clear as to why the investigating officer requires the applicant's presence in custody. The application is allowed. In the event of the applicant’s arrest in C.R. No.I-82 of 2012 of Bhiwandi Taluka Police Station, District Thane, the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of `25,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the sum aggregating to `25,000/- on the condition that the applicant shall report at the police station concerned initially on 3-7-2012 at 11:00 a.m. for interrogation and thereafter as and when required by the I.O..
#2. The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and he shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the trial Court.
#3. This order shall remain in force till the trial is over with the only stipulation that if charge-sheeted, the applicant may ABA-564.2012 furnish fresh bonds before the trial Court in view of the Judgment of the Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., reported in AIR 2011 SC
#4. The application accordingly stands
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.