Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Abdul Rahman @ Bablu S/O. Abdul Basit vs The State Of Maharashtra on 4 March, 2019

Author: V. K. Jadhav

Bench: V. K. Jadhav

                                                              11-ABA-138-2019.odt
                                          -1-


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

         11 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.138 OF 2019
                              WITH
              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 808 OF 2019

                ABDUL RAHMAN @ BABLU S/O. ABDUL BASIT
                               VERSUS
                      THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                      ...
                   Advocate for Applicant : Mr. G.R. Syed
                  APP for Respondent/State: Mr. B.V. Virdhe
                Advocate to assist APP: Mr. Santosh C. Bhosle
                                      ...
                                         CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.
                                         DATED : 4th MARCH , 2019

 PER COURT:-

 1.       Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant

 in Criminal Application No.808 of 2019. For the reasons

 stated in the application, the same is allowed in terms of

 prayer clause "B" and disposed of accordingly.

 2.       The applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection

 with Crime No.0009 of 2019 registered with Bhokar Police

 Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under

 Sections 381, 406 and 323 read with Section 34 of IPC. His

 application         with      similar   prayer   bearing        Misc.      Criminal

 Application No.13 of 2019 came to be rejected by the

 Additional          Sessions      Judge,       Bhokar     by      order        dated

 18.01.2019.




::: Uploaded on - 04/03/2019                        ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2019 14:54:38 :::
                                                            11-ABA-138-2019.odt
                                         -2-
 3.       The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

 allegations made in the F.I.R. though admitted as it is, no

 offence under Sections 406 and 381 of IPC even prima facie

 is made out as against the applicant. So far as the present

 applicant is concerned, there was no entrustment of the

 property or the applicant was not having any dominion over

 the property, in any manner. There was no question of

 misappropriating dishonestly the property owned by the

 informant. So far as the charge under Section 381 is

 concerned that pertains to the theft committed by the

 servant. Admittedly, the applicant is not servant of the

 informant. The antecedents of the applicant are clear. He

 may be released on anticipatory bail.

 4.       The learned APP assisted by Mr. Santosh C. Bhosle,

 learned Advocate, has strongly resisted the application on

 the ground that at this stage, it would not be desirable to go

 into the ingredients of Section 406 and 381 of IPC,

 respectively.          The    serious   allegations   have       been       made

 against the present applicant. It has been alleged in the

 F.I.R. that by joining hands with Muneem of the informant,

 the applicant has taken away the grocery articles without

 any payment thereon. The custodial interrogation of the

 applicant is required to recover the said grocery articles or



::: Uploaded on - 04/03/2019                     ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2019 14:54:38 :::
                                                               11-ABA-138-2019.odt
                                          -3-
 the amount thereof. The applicant is not entitled for

 anticipatory bail.

 5.       On      going        through   the    allegations      made         in    the

 complaint and on perusal of the investigation papers, it

 appears that even though the allegations made in the F.I.R.

 are accepted as it is, prima facie, no case is made out

 against the applicant for the offences punishable under

 Sections 406 and 381 of the Indian Penal Code. So far as

 the charge under Section 381 is concerned, admittedly the

 applicant is not the servant of the informant. So far as the

 charge under Section 406 is concerned, the applicant is

 admittedly is not connected with the grocery shop of the

 informant. It has been alleged in the complaint that the co-

 accused Muneem has handed over certain grocery articles to

 the applicant by accepting certain amount from him. The

 applicant has no dominion over the property of the

 informant in any manner. The antecedents of the applicant

 are clear. Even though the applicant on his own has given

 offer to pay Rs.1,50,000/- to the informant as damages, the

 informant is not ready to accept the same for the reason

 best known to him. Thus, considering the entire aspects of

 the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the

 applicant with certain conditions. Hence, the following order:



::: Uploaded on - 04/03/2019                        ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2019 14:54:38 :::
                                                            11-ABA-138-2019.odt
                                       -4-
                                      ORDER

I. The application is hereby allowed.

II. In the event of arrest of the applicant i.e. ABDUL RAHMAN @ BABLU S/O. ABDUL BASIT - in connection with Crime No.0009 of 2019 registered with Bhokar Police Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 381, 406 and 323 read with Section 34 of IPC, he be released on bail on his furnishing P.B. of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with one surety of the like amount, on the following conditions;

a. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

b. The applicant shall attend the concerend Police Station once in a week i.e. on every Sunday between 8.00 am to 11.00 am, till filing of the charge sheet.

III. The anticipatory bail application is accordingly disposed of.

( V. K. JADHAV, J.) Sam..

::: Uploaded on - 04/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2019 14:54:38 :::