SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Archana Shah vs The State Of Maharashtra on 19 August, 2019

1-ABA 1798-19.odt



Archana Shah …Applicant
State of Maharashtra …Respondent

• Mr. Fauzan Shaikh alongwith Mr. Abhishek Upadhye, Advocate
for the Applicant.
• Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP for the State.
• Mr. D.R. Gabhale, HC-9432, Swargate Police Station, Pune,

DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2019
P.C. :

1. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with

CR No. 325/19 registered at Swargate Police Station, Pune for the

offences punishable under Section 380 of the IPC on 5th July 2019.

2. The FIR is lodged by one Pramod Shah. The informant was

having a shop by name Patanjali Mega Store at Gultekadi. In

November and December 2017, the informant came to know that

there were some incidents of theft in his shop. They verified the

CCTV footages. They found that on 9th December 2017 a lady had

come to their shop with her young son. She had picked up some

Nikita Gadgil 1/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2019 21/08/2019 21:14:55 :::
1-ABA 1798-19.odt

articles and had concealed them in her jacket. According to the

informant, on 5th January 2018, same lady again visited the shop

and tried to steal articles. She was detained. Police were called.

3. It is the case of the informant that the lady gave her name as

Dhanashri Patil, which turned out to be a false name. She had

given in writing that she had taken away those articles and she

begged for pardon. It is the case of the informant that on

humanitarian ground, she was allowed to go and no further action

was taken. On further inquiry, it was found that the mobile

number was not in her name. The lady had given a false name. In

reality she was none other than the present applicant. The

applicant is working in reputed software company in Pune. The

informant further mentioned that he was a cancer patient. He did

not lodge FIR immediately and it was lodged only on 5th July 2019.

4. Heard, Mr.Shaikh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.

Yadav, learned APP for the State.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR

against the applicant is motivated. The applicant’s husband is

informant’s friend and he has instigated the informant to lodge this

Nikita Gadgil 2/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2019 21/08/2019 21:14:55 :::
1-ABA 1798-19.odt

FIR. He further submitted that the applicant herself had lodged an

FIR vide CR No. 237/19 on 28th April 2019 at Swargate Police

Station under Sections 498A, Section323, Section504, Section506 read with Sectionsection 34

of the IPC. In that FIR apart from her harassment at the hands of

the husband, she has also referred to this incident of alleged theft.

She has stated in her FIR that in the year 2018, in the month of

January, she had purchased some articles from the informant’s

shop. At that time, cashier at the counter alleged that she had not

paid bills on the last occasion. The applicant, voluntarily paid the

bill immediately. It is her case that she had paid Rupees One

Thousand. The applicant in her FIR has further mentioned that the

informant Pramod Shah told this fact to her husband, which

became a tool in the hands of the applicant’s husband to cause

harassment. It is mentioned in her FIR that the husband took

advantage of the situation and pressurized her to give divorce by

mutual consent. On these basis, she has lodged this FIR.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, submitted that

husband of the applicant is tried to instigate her and therefore,

custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary.

Nikita Gadgil 3/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2019 21/08/2019 21:14:55 :::
1-ABA 1798-19.odt

7. Learned APP submitted that the informant has CCTV

footages of the theft and the investigation officer is in possession

of such footages. He therefore, submitted that offence is clearly

established and therefore, she does not deserve protection of

anticipatory bail.

8. I have considered these submissions. The alleged incident

had taken place in December 2017. The FIR itself shows that the

first informant had pardoned the applicant and had not taken any

action. The applicant was made to execute it in writing. Whether

such pressurising tactics is justified or not, is a separate question.

However, assuming that the applicant has not paid the bill of the

articles, which she had taken, her FIR shows that she had infact

made payment of Rupees One Thousand. If at all, the allegations

pertains to a petty offence for which according to the applicant,

she has already paid Rupees One Thousand. The applicant is

working in a reputed software company. Her custodial

interrogation will ruin her future. He had a son about 13 years

age, who is residing with her. She is facing matrimonial dispute.

She had lodged her FIR in April 2019. Thereafter, the present FIR

Nikita Gadgil 4/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2019 21/08/2019 21:14:55 :::
1-ABA 1798-19.odt

is lodged by her in the month of April 2019. The FIR itself

mentioned that at the first incident, the informant had decided not

to take any action against the applicant.

9. In this view of the matter, custodial interrogation of the

applicant is not necessary. The applicant of course will have to co-

operate with the investigation and will have to attend the police

station as and when called. In this view of the matter, following

order is passed:-


(I) In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R. No.
325/19 registered at Swargate Police Station, Pune, the
Applicant is directed to be released on bail on her furnishing
PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station
as and when called and shall co-operate with the

(iii) Application stands disposed of accordingly.


Nikita Gadgil 5/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2019 21/08/2019 21:14:55 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation