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 12, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Nikhil Bhagatsingh Singhani vs The State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 2021

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

Ganesh Lokhande                          1 of 6                50-aba-330-21.doc




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
     CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.330 OF 2021

Nikhil Bhagatsingh Singhani                           ...Applicant

         Versus

The State of Maharashtra                              ...Respondent
                                 .....
Mr. Vikram Sutaria i/b. Mr. Kunal Ambulkar, Advocate for the
Applicant.
Mr. A. R. Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent - State.
API- Prashant S. Tayade, Vashi Police Station, Navi Mumbai.
                                 .....

                              CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
                              DATE : 5th FEBRUARY, 2021.

PC :

1.                The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with

C.R. No. 305 of 2020, registered with Vashi Police Station on

28th September, 2020 for offences punishable under Sections 354,

354(A), 354(B), 354(D) 323, 504 and 506 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal

Code, 1860 ("IPC" for short).


2.                The case of the complainant is that husband of her

friend Mr.Suman Sinha had rented the shop Gala No. 37/42 Ground

Floor, Shiv Centre, Navi Mumbai to the applicant and accused No. 2

from 22nd October, 2018. There were disputes between them over

theft of documents and articles. On 5th May, 2019 the applicant and

accused No. 2 had called Mr.Suman Sinha to have a discussion over
 Ganesh Lokhande                      2 of 6               50-aba-330-21.doc




dispute, but since Mr. Sinha was busy, he had asked his wife Mrs.

Ragini Sinha to proceed. Mrs.Ragini Sinha asked first informant to

accompany her. The first informant and Mrs. Sinha reached the shop

at 2.00 p.m. Applicant and accused No.2 were not there. However,

workers were present. Mrs.Sinha then telephoned accused No.2

Pratiksha Singhani to enquire as to when they are reaching. She was

informed that they are reaching in short time. Two workers started

abusing them and manhandled them. Mrs.Sinha told first informant

to wait there and proceeded to Vashi Police Station for lodging

complaint. Thereafter, applicant and Pratiksha Singhani came there

alongwith two persons. Accused No.2 asked first informant as to why

she came there and started abusing and assaulting her. The hand of

the first informant was twisted by the applicant. He pulled her

dupatta and committed act of outraging her modesty. Her kurta was

torn. Accused No. 2 was instigating the applicant and other persons.

One of them was video recording the incident. Complainant snatched

the phone and threw it on ground. Mrs.Ragini Sinha returned to

spot. Police arrived and all of them were taken to police station. On

the complaint of complainant N.C. complaint was registered under

Sections 323, 504, 506, 34 of IPC. The complainant again visited

police station on 18th May, 2019 but complaint of outraging modesty

was not recorded. On 20th May, 2019 complainant was threatened by
 Ganesh Lokhande                          3 of 6              50-aba-330-21.doc




one Deepak that he has video recording of incident and if complaint

is lodged he would make video viral. Thereafter on 21 st September,

2020 two persons approached complainant and told her not to lodge

complaint and amount of Rs.3,00,000/-would be paid to her. She

was threatened.


3.                Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that First

Information Report ("FIR" for short) lodged by the complainant, is

false. The allegations are concocted. The FIR was registered on

24th September, 2020. The incident had occurred at 5 th May, 2019.

The complainant has lodged an N.C. complaint on 5 th May, 2019 for

offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC. There is no

whisper about alleged act amounting to outraging modesty. The

complainant then lodged the complaint to police on 11 th September,

2019 in which the complainant has alleged the commission of

offences under Sections 354(A), 354(B), 354(D) of IPC and other

offences. Complainant then filed a private complaint before the

learned Magistrate seeking investigation under Section 156(3) of

Cr.PC on 23rd September, 2019. Learned Magistrate passed an Order

that the complainant is required to be examined for enquiry under

Section 200 of Cr.PC. The said order was challenged by the

complainant by preferring Criminal Revision Application No. 40 of

2020. Pending the said Revision Application and without order being
 Ganesh Lokhande                          4 of 6               50-aba-330-21.doc




set by Court, the complainant had approached the police and by

suppressing the aforesaid facts FIR has been registered.


4.                Learned APP submitted that the offence under Section

354 is made out. The photographs indicate that the complainant was

subjected to assault and the complainant has alleged that accused

has outraged her modesty. Learned APP however submitted that it is

not clear whether the concerned police station was informed, about

private complaint and refusal to direct investigation under Section

156(3) of Cr.PC. There is no illegality in registration of FIR.


5.                The incident had occurred on 5th May, 2019. Police had

arrived at the spot. Both parties were taken to police station. N. C.

was registered on complaint of complainant for offences under

Sections 323, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC. No allegations of outraging

modesty. Written complaint was filed on 9th September, 2019 wherein

it is alleged that accused have committed offence under Section 354

of IPC. Private complaint was filed seeking investigation under

Section 156(3) of Cr.PC. By order dated 11 th November, 2019 Court

observed that detail enquiry is necessary before issue of process and

complainant should be examined. Hence, instead of investigation

under Section 156(3) inquiry be conducted under Section 200 of

Cr.PC. The complainant preferred revision application before
 Ganesh Lokhande                            5 of 6               50-aba-330-21.doc




Sessions Court challenging Order dated 11th November, 2019 on

24th February, 2019. There exists dispute between applicants and

Mr.Suman Sinha and his wife. Accused No. 4 filed suit before Civil

Judge for eviction. On 24th September, 2020 Mr.Suman Sinha has

lodged FIR against applicant and others for offences under

Sections 452, 380, 427 and 34 of IPC. Considering the aforesaid

circumstances, the applicant need not be subjected to custodial

interrogation.


6.                Hence, I pass the following order.


                                    ORDER

i. Anticipatory Bail Application No.330 of 2021, is allowed; ii. In the event of arrest of applicant in connection with C.R. No. 305 of 2020, registered with Vashi Police Station, the applicant be released on bail on executing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only), with one or more sureties in the like amount;

iii. The applicant shall report Investigating officer on 11 th, 12th and 13th February, 2021 between 11.00 am. to 1.00 pm. till filling of charge-sheet;

iv. Applicant shall not approach the victim or tamper the evidence Ganesh Lokhande 6 of 6 50-aba-330-21.doc in any manner;

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)