Bombay High Court
Himmat Ramchandra Bhoir vs The State Of Maharashtra on 28 June, 2021
Author: Prakash D. Naik
Bench: Prakash D. Naik
1 of 3 32.ABA.1283.2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1283 OF 2021
Himmat Ramchandra Bhoir Applicant
versus
The State of Maharashtra Respondent
Mr.R.D.Suryawanshi for applicant.
Mr.A.R.Kapadnis, APP, for State.
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 28th June 2021
PC :
1. This is an application for anticipatory bail in CR No.I-0222 of
2019 registered with Navghar Police Station for offence under
Sections 420, 465, 467 of Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the application for
anticipatory bail preferred by the applicant was rejected by the
Sessions Court by an order dated 10 th October 2019. Whereas, co-
accused Vishwas Mhatre, Gajanan Mhatre, Alka Patil and Madhuri
Patil had also preferred application for anticipatory bail before the
same Court which was allowed by order dated 10th December 2019.
In paragraph 6 of the said order it was observed that the applicants
therein had succeeded in pointing out that the mutation entries have
not been challenged by the complainant which is sufficient to show
that the dispute is of civil nature and the remedy lies before Civil
Court. It is submitted that although the application preferred by the
applicant in 2019 was rejected, notice u/s.41A of Cr.P.C was received
by the applicant on 16th May 2020.
::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/06/2021 21:45:38 :::
2 of 3 32.ABA.1283.2021.doc
3. Learned APP submits that during the course of investigation
and pursuant to the aforesaid orders, several documents are
collected by the Investigating Officer which disclose the complicity of
applicant. Learned counsel, however, disputes the submission. It is
contended that undisputedly the mutation entries were not
challenged.
4. The applicant was granted interim protection vide order dated
11th June 2021 with direction to report Investigating Officer. The
applicant has complied the said direction . Learned APP submits that
statement of applicant was recorded on 17th June 2021. The
applicant has not co-operated with investigation. He has not
produced any documents requisitioned by the Investigating Officer.
5. Per contra, learned advocate for applicant states that in the
order dated 10th December 2019 passed by Additional Sessions
Judge, Thane in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2854 of 2019, it
was observed that mutation entries are not being challenged by the
complainant till date. It is sufficient to say that dispute is of civil
nature and based on documents. The documents are in possession of
Investigating Officer.
6. Considering the submissions of both sides and the documents
placed on record for consideration, the applicant need not be
subjected for custodial interrogation. Interim order deserves to be
confirmed. Hence, I pass following order :
ORDER
(i) Interim order dated 11th June 2021 is confirmed;
::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/06/2021 21:45:38 :::3 of 3 32.ABA.1283.2021.doc
(ii) In the event of arrest of applicant in connection with CR No.I- 0222 of 2019 registered with Navghar Police Station, the applicant be released on bail on executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount;
(iii) The applicant shall report the Investigating Officer as and when called for;
(iv) Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of in above terms.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) MST ::: Uploaded on - 30/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/06/2021 21:45:38 :::