Tag: Criminal Anticipatory Bail

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 860 OF 2023 Rajkumar C. Mhatre …Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent. Mr. Kuldeep Patil a/w. Ms Saili N. Dhuru for the Applicant. Mrs. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent/State Mr. Ranjeet Patil for the Intervenor. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 23.03.2023. P.C. : The learned counsel for the applicant, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the present application. Leave granted. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of as withdrawn. [N.R.BORKAR, J.]

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1679 of 2021 Ajit Anil Satkar .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … Mr.Sachin Deokar for the applicant. Smt.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 27th JULY 2021 P.C:- 1 At the outset, counsel for the applicant seek liberty to implead the complainant as respondent. Liberty as prayed for is granted. Necessary amendment to be carried out within three days. On the amendment being carried out, issue notice to respondent, making it returnable on 13th August 2021. 2 Learned APP is also requested to intimate respondent no.2 about she being impleaded as party respondent in the application and that the next date of hearing of the application being 13th August 2021, through the concerned Investigating Officer. 3 On completing the service, list the application on 13th August 2021. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1679 OF 2021 Ajit Anil Satkar .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents … Mr.Sachin Deokar for the Applicant. Mr.A.R.Kapadnis, APP for the State. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 13th AUGUST, 2021 ... P.C:- The notice issued to respondent No.2 is awaited. Learned APP is requested to inform the complainant about flinn of proceedinns throunh the concerned Investinatinn Offcer and that the matter is scheduled for further hearinn on 07/09/2021. ( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1679 OF 2021 Ajit Anil Satkar … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents Mr. Sachin H. Deokar, Advocate for Applicant. Smt.Veera Shinde, A.P.P. for Respondent-State. Mr.D.B.Desai, PSI, Vadgaon Maval Police Station. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 7th September, 2021. P.C. : After hearing the learned counsel for the Applicant at length, when this Court expressed its disinclination to grant any relief, the learned counsel, on instructions seeks leave to withdraw the present Application with liberty to the Applicant to surrender before the concerned Magistrate having jurisdiction over Vadgaon Maval Police Station, Pune (Rural) on or before 11.00 a.m. of 13th September, 2021. Leave and liberty granted. It is made clear that, the period to surrender will not be extended on any count. Application is disposed off as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty. [A.S. GADKARI, J.]

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1463 OF 2022 Bherulal Govind Joshi ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT None for Applicant Smt. Anamika Malhotra, APP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE BHARATI DANGRE J DATE : 6th June, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 04/07/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: Bherulal Govind Joshi .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Ms.Lalita L. Rajguru for the Applicant. Ms.Anamika Malhotra, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. API Vinayak Jadhav attached to Nayanagar Police Station, present. ... … CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 04th JULY, 2022 P.C:- SALGAONKAR M M Digitally signed by SALGAONKAR M M Date: 2022.07.05 16:48:37 +0530 The learned counsel for the applicant states that, inadvertently two applications came to be fled by the same applicant. She, therefore, seeks permission to withdraw the present application. Permission granted. The application stands disposed off as withdrawn. ( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1527 OF 2022 Parag Shankar Ramugade .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Sanjeev Kadam with Mr.Raju M. Yamgar for the Applicant. Mr.S.V.Gavand, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. ... … CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 10th JUNE, 2022 P.C:- In the wake of the accusations faced by the applicant pursuant to an order being passed under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., it would be imperative that the complainant is impleaded as party respondent. The learned counsel for the applicant states that he shall implead the complainant as party respondent. Amendment shall be carried out forthwith. The learned A.P.P. shall inform the complainant about his impleadment in the proceedings. Re-notify to 15/06/2022. ( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.) M.M.Salgaonkar

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1527 OF 2022 Parag Shankar Ramugade APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Adv. Sanjeev Kadam a/w Adv. Raju Yamgar For Applicant Shri S. V. Gawand, APP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE BHARATI DANGRE J DATE : 15th June, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 23/06/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1527 OF 2022 Parag Shankar Ramugade .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Sanjeev Kadam with Mr.Raju M. Yamgar for the Applicant. Ms.Veera Shinde, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. Mr.D.T.Dhonde, API attached to Kopri Police Station, present. ... … CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 23rd JUNE, 2022 P.C:- At the request of the learned counsel Mr.Kadam, re-notify to 24/06/2022. The matter shall be listed on the supplementary board. ( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.) M.M.Salgaonkar

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SALGAONKAR M M Digitally signed by SALGAONKAR M M Date: 2022.06.27 18:29:58 +0530 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1527 OF 2022 Parag Shankar Ramugade .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.Sanjeev Kadam with Mr.Raju M. Yamgar for the Applicant. Ms.Veera Shinde, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. … The complainant is present in the Court. Mr.D.T.Dhonde, API attached to Kopri Police Station, for the Intervenor. ... CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 24th JUNE, 2022 P.C:- The learned counsel Mr.Kadam, on instructions, states that the applicant has an offer to be made to the complainant, who is present in the Court. He states that if such offer is acceptable by the complainant, the matter can be settled. In view of the above, list the application on 30/06/2022. ( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1527 OF 2022 Parag Shankar Ramugade ] ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] ... Respondent Mr. Sanjiv P. Kadam i/b Raju Yamgar and Mr. Rajesh Kakad for the applicant. … … Ms. Veera Shinde, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 30TH JUNE, 2022. P.C.:- In presence of the complainant, the consent terms are tendered on record by learned counsel Mr. Sanjeev Kadam, appearing for the applicant. By the consent terms, the applicant has agreed to transfer rights, title, share and interest in Shop No.FF13 admeasuring 390 sq. ft. and Flat No.FF3 admeasuring 730 sq.ft. situated at Survey No.173/17/1, Emerald Tower, Agashivnagar Nagar, Near Emerson Company, Karad Dhebewadi Main Road, Malkapur, Karad, District Satara, in favour of the complainant, as full and final settlement of disputes between the parties. The applicant has also undertaken that the stamp duty, registration charges and other incidental expenses shall be borne by the applicant. It records that on account of full and final settlement, the parties would take appropriate steps for quashing of the FIR and the complainant has accorded his unconditional consent for quashing the subject FIR. The consent terms are taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. Since Mr. Kadam makes a specific statement that the full and final settlement shall be effected between the parties within four weeks from today. Accepting the said statement as undertaking, list on 28/07/2022. In the wake of the understanding arrived at, between the parties, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the applicant. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1527 OF 2022 …. Mr Parag Shankar Ramugade Applicant v/s. State of Maharashtra & Anr. Respondents Mr Raju Yamgar, for the Applicant. Mr Amit A Palkar, APP, for Respondent State. None for the Intervenor. PSI Ulhas Ganpat Surve, Kopri Police Station, present. …. Coram : R.N. Laddha, J. Date : 22 July 2024 P.C. : . None present for the informant/respondent no.2. At the joint request of learned Counsel for the applicant and learned APP, stand over to 26 July 2024. Ad-interim relief granted earlier shall continue to operate till the next date. (R.N. Laddha, J.) Page 1 of 1 _______________________________________________ 22 July 2024

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1527 of 2022 Parag Shankar Ramugade ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Raju M. Yamgar a/w. Bharti Lokhande, for the Applicant. Mr. Amit A. Palkar, APP for the Respondent – State. None for the Complainant / Respondent No.2. Coram: R. N. Laddha, J. Date: 26 July 2024 P.C. . None present for the informant / respondent No.2. The learned counsel for the applicant also seeks an adjournment and states that the parties have amicably settled their disputes. Stand over to 29 July 2024. Interim protection granted earlier, if any, shall continue to operate till the next date. R. N. Laddha, J. Page 1 of 1

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1527 OF 2022 Mr Parag Shankar Ramugade Applicant v/s. State of Maharashtra & Anr. Respondents Ms Bharti Lokhande, i/b. Raju Yamgar, for the Applicant. Mr Yogesh Y Dabake, APP, for Respondent State. …. Coram : R.N. Laddha, J. Date : 29 July 2024 P.C. : . The learned Counsel for the applicant, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw this application. Leave granted as prayed for. The application stands dismissed as withdrawn. (R.N. Laddha, J.) Page 1 of 1 _______________________________________________ 29 July 2024 Digitally signed by SMITA JOHNSON GONSALVES 14:17:00 +0530 SMITA JOHNSON GONSALVES

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 696 OF 2014 Shashikant Chandrakant Rane … Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. R. Sathyanarayanan, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for the State. CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 17th June, 2014. P.C. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the police from Mulund Police Station have arrested the applicant/accused, hence this Application for anticipatory bail has become infructuous and so he wants to withdraw this Application. Hence, the Application for the anticipatory bail is dismissed as withdrawn. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 4: SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Digitally signed by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2023.06.02 16:44:17 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1486 OF 2023 Sachin Hemant Sawant and Anr. ...Applicants vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents ***** Mr.Mayank Joshi – Advocate for Applicants. Mr.Y.Y.Dabke – APP for the Respondent – State. ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : st 31 MAY, 2023 P. C. :- Mentioned out of turn. Learned Advocate for the Applicants seeks liberty to carry out an amendment in the Application. Liberty granted. It be carried out within a week. Copy be served on other side. Matter be kept on 13th June, 2023. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1486 OF 2023 Sachin Hemant Sawant And Anr. APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra And Ors. RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHRIRAM MADHUSUDAN MODAK J DATE : 17th July, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 17/08/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1486 OF 2023 Sachin Hemant Sawant And Anr. APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra And Ors. RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHRIRAM MADHUSUDAN MODAK J DATE : 24th July, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 28/07/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1486 OF 2023 Sachin Hemant Sawant and Anr. ...Applicants vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents ***** Mr. Mayank Joshi - Advocate for the Applicant Mr. H. J. Dedhia - APP for the Respondent/State ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 28th JULY, 2023 P. C. :- The Respondent No. 2 is department of the CGST. Recently, they have not been served about circulation. Matter be kept on 31st July, 2023, high on board. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 13: +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1486 OF 2023 Sachin Hemant Sawant and Anr. ...Applicants vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents ***** Mr.Mayank Joshi a/w Mr.Sumedh Sonawane and Mr.Parshva Bhankharia – Advocates for Applicants. Mr.H.J.Dedhia – APP for Respondent No.1 – State. Mr.Santosh Khedkar – Assistant Commissioner SGST–Mazgaon, Mumbai–INV–044. Mr.Rajendra Pisal – State Tax Officer–Thane–THA–SUR–C–002. ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATED : 31ST JULY 2023 P. C. : Heard learned Advocate for the Applicants. There is a preliminary objection taken by learned APP about placing this Application before the concerned Court. According to him, Thane Office of Sales Tax Department is not going to lodge prosecution but Competent Authority is the Mazgaon Office – Mumbai. With their assistance, my attention is invited to the following three documents :- (a) A show cause notice issued for cancellation of registration on Page No.22 dated 7th September, 2022. (b) Summons issued by Assistant Commissioner of State Tax – Mazgaon, Mumbai dated 31st March, 2023 on Page No.25 wherein, the Applicant was directed to remain present for recording statement under Section 70 of MGST Act. (c) A show cause notice for cancellation of registration dated 26th April, 2023 issued by Thane Office (Page No.31). Learned APP after taking instructions submitted that Thane Office is not going to initiate any prosecution against the Applicant. The statement is accepted. In view of that, the subject does not fall within the assignment of this Court. So, only apprehension remains is on the basis of summons issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax – Mazgaon. In respect of that apprehension, let Office to place it before Appropriate Bench. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1486 OF 2023 Sachin Hemant Sawant and Anr. … Applicants versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents None for Applicants. Mr. R.M.Pethe, APP for State. CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J. DATE : 8 SEPTEMBER 2023 P.C. None appears for the Applicants when called out. Stand over to 12 October 2023. ( N.J.JAMADAR, J. ) SSP 1/1

Order - Status 18: 4-ABA-1486-23.DOC Sayali Upasani IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1486 OF 2023 Sachin Hemant Sawant and Others ...Applicants Vs. State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondents None for Applicants. Mr. M. G. Patil, APP for State. CORAM:- N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED:- 12th OCTOBER, 2023 PC:- None present for the applicants. None had appeared for the applicants on 8th September, 2023 as well. The application stands dismissed for want of prosecution. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] Signed by: Sayali D Upasani Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 13/10/2023 11:46:26 1/1

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.712 OF 2015 James D'Souza ..Applicant. versus State of Maharashtra ..Respondent. ..... Mr. Parvez Memon with Mr. Ravi Mishra i/b MZM Legal for the Applicant. Mr. Arfan Sait, Addl. P.P. for the State. ..... CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J. (VACATION COURT) 19th May 2015. P.C. : The Applicant has been charged with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code by the Deccan Police Station vide F.I.R. No.98 of 2015 dated 2nd April, 2015. It is the case of the complainant that she was working with the travel agency viz. Sudin Travel Agency, Karve Road, Pune. The Applicant on telephone approached her and pretended that he is the owner of Dark Oranges Hospitality company and regularly requires substantial quantity of air tickets. Under that pretext, the Applicant got booking of 20 air tickets, domestic and international, from the complainant. It is further the case of the Applicant that the total value of the said tickets was Rs.7,50,000/-. Despite repeated requests from the complainant, the Applicant did not pay the said amount and on some or the other pretext avoided to pay the same. It was further revealed to the complaint that the company viz. Dark Oranges Hospitality was not in existence at the address mentioned therein. She, therefore, lodged a complaint with the police. The police are investigating the said crime. The learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the present case is of civil nature and it is only because of the dispute about the quantum of amount to be paid to the complainant, the amount remained to be paid. He expressed his willingness to deposit the disputed amount in this Court with a view to prove his bonafide. It appears to me that the offence is simpliciter under Section 420 and the Applicant has expressed his desire to prove his bonafide by depositing the disputed amount in this Court. On this ground, I am inclined to release the Applicant on anticipatory bail upto 11th June, 2015 on the following conditions : i) The Applicant shall deposit the amount of Rs.7,50,000/- by way of demand draft in the Registry of this Court within a period of three days from today. Subject to deposit of the said amount by the Applicant, in the event of arrest, the Applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and a solvent surety in the like amount; ii) The Applicant shall attend the Deccan Police Station, Pune as and when called for between 11.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m.; iii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and/or shall not indulge into any act amounting to tampering of evidence; iv) In case, the Applicant fails to deposit the amount within a period of three days from today, the protection granted to the Applicant shall come to an end without further reference to this Court; v) It is further made clear that the period of three days shall not be extended in any event and for whatsoever reason. Place this matter on Board on 11th June, 2015 for further orders. (A.S. Gadkari, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 712 OF 2015 James D'Souza .....Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Sherbir Panag a/w Parvez Memon & Ravi Mishra i/b MZM Legal for Applicant Ms. P. P. Shinde APP for the State. CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J. DATED : 7th JULY 2015 PC : By an order dated 19/05/2015, Vacation Court (Coram: A. S. Gadkari, J.) had granted conditional pre-arrest bail to the applicant. Condition was that he shall deposit amount of Rs. 7,50,000/- by way of demand draft in this Court within a period of 3 days from 19/05/2015. It is an admitted position that order has not been complied with till today. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he would still be willing to deposit Rs. 5,00,000/-, however, according to him, amount of Rs. 7,50,000/- is the amount alleged by the complainant and that criminal proceedings cannot be treated as recovery proceedings. Learned Vacation Court had observed that counsel for the applicant had expressed his willingness to deposit the disputed amount in this Court with a view to prove his bonafides. Today, as the amount is disputed, judicial propriety warrants that application be heard and decided by the same bench. In view of this, Registry shall take directions and place the matter before appropriate Bench. However, learned counsel for the applicant would be at liberty to take steps. Removed from board. (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.)

Order - Status 11: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.712 OF 2015. Mr. James D'Souza ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr. Ravi Mishra i/b MZM Legal for Applicant. Mrs. Prajakta Shinde, APP for Respondent-State. CORAM: A.S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 21st July 2015. P.C. 1 This matter is placed before me in pursuance of order dated 7th July 2015 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench as I had passed the interim order dated 19.5.2015. 2 Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 3 The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that, though the statement was made on behalf of the applicant on 19th May 2015 before this Court thereby expressing his willingness to deposit the disputed amount in this Court with a view to prove bonafide of the applicant, the applicant could not deposit the same within the said stipulated period and even as of today as the applicant is running short of the funds. He further submits that the applicant is trying to settle the matter out of the Court with the original complainant, but due to order dated 19.5.20015 the same could not take place. 4 It is to be noted here that in order dated 19.5.20015 in para-2, a statement of the Counsel for the applicant was recorded. The said statement is undoubtedly based on the instructions given by the applicant to his Counsel. On the basis of the said statement, the disputed amount was to be deposited within a period of three days from the date of order i.e. from 19.5.2015. As stated above, the said order has not been complied with. The applicant has failed to comply with the said order and has enjoyed prearrest bail till today. It is surprising to note here that the police authorities have also not taken notice of the condition imposed in para no.3(i), upon the applicant by the said order dated 19.5.2015. Para-3 (i) of the order dated 19.5.20015 reads as under: "The Applicant shall deposit the amount of Rs.7,50,000/- by way of demand draft in the Registry of this Court within a period of three days from today. Subject to deposit of the said amount by the Applicant, in the event of arrest, the Applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal 2 bond of Rs.50,000/- and a solvent surety in the like amount." 5 The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that his client is ready and willing to deposit the admitted amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in this Court as the applicant is disputing amount of Rs.7,50,000/- as has been mentioned in the said order. In my considered opinion this statement is clearly an afterthought of the applicant after enjoying pre-arrest bail for a considerable period. 6 Thus, it is clear that order dated 19.5.2015 was self-operative and failure on the part of the applicant to deposit the said amount, the anticipatory bail granted to the applicant has already come to an end. May that as it may, apart from the prima facie observations made in the order dated 19.5.2015 even on merits also the application has little merits. The minute perusal of the First Information Report and the documents of investigation, reveals that the applicant is perpetrator of the said crime and his custodial interrogation by the police is necessary for the purpose of further investigation. 7 In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the present Application and is accordingly dismissed. (A.S. GADKARI,J.) ABA.712-2015

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 818 OF 2015 Mr. Ismail S/o. Mehmoob Sayyed ... Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.A.M.Saraogi, Advocate,for the applicant. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP, for the State CORAM: SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV,J. DATE : 2nd July, 2015. P.C . Heard. This is an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. The applicant herein is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.249 of 2014 registered at Basant Park (Chembur) Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. The applicant had approached the Court of Sessions seeking pre-arrest bail in the year 2014. By an order dated 30.5.2014, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge had directed the Investigating Officer to give 48 hours' notice to the applicant prior to his arrest. The application was disposed of. Mhi 2 ABA-818-15.sxw The Senior Inspector of Police of Chembur Police Station had requested the officer in charge of Aurad Police Station, Dist. Bidar, Karnataka State that the present applicant is wanted in Crime No.249 of 2014 registered at Chembur Police Station and in the eventuality that the applicant is traced, he shall be detained and the information be relegated to Chembur Police Station. It is pertinent to note that the police personnel of Chembur Police Station had made several visits to serve a 48 hours notice upon the applicant, but to no avail as his permanent address is not known. It appears that the applicant is absconding. The learned counsel for the applicant has fairly submitted that the applicant was not even arrested in the offence registered against him at Aurad Police Station. The whereabouts of the applicant are not known. There is no impugned order which may be challenged before this Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. In view of this, the applicant doe not deserve the discretionary relief in the nature of pre-arrest bail. Hence, the application being sans merits, stands rejected. (SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 130 OF 2020 Jabin Nawaj Shaikh Sajit Salim Hundekari ...Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ….. Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w Mr. Sunil Kamble, Advocate for the Applicants. Smt. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State-Respondent. Mr. P.A. Gaikwad, Police Hawaldar, Shrikapur Police Station, Present. ….. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 17th January, 2020 PC : The applicants had preferred an application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court in connection with C.R. No. 5 of 2020 registered with Shikrapur Police Station, Pune Rural for offences punishable under Sections 306, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. By order dated 9th January, 2020 the learned Special Judge had declined to grant interim protection to the applicants. However, the other accused were granted interim protection. The order further indicates that the accused-applicants were directed to remain present before the Court till the disposal of the main application. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that, in the event the applicant remains present before the Sessions Court, there is apprehension of their arrest. It is further submitted that the applicant No.1 is pregnant lady. It is also submitted that the applicants are having similar role with other accused who were granted interim protection. The case before the Sessions Court for hearing the application is tomorrow. Considering the aforesaid circumstance, interim protection can be granted to the applicants pending their application before Sessions Court. O R D E R i) In the event of arrest of applicants in C.R. No. 5 of 2020 registered with Shikrapur Police Station, Pune Rural, the applicants be released on bail on furnishing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount; ii) This interim protection shall operate till the disposal of the application, pending before the Sessions Court. It is made clear that this court has not adjudicated merits of the case and the Sessions Court shall deal with the application in accordance with law. iii) Application stands disposed of accordingly. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

#VALUE!