SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sanjay Sampat Gadkari vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21 September, 2018

919 aba 1937-18.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1937 OF 2018

Sanjay Sampatrao Gadkari ..Applicant

v/s.

The State of Maharashtra . ..Respondents

Mr. Aniket Nikam a/w. Mr. Ashish Satpute for the Applicant.
Mr. S.R.Agarkar, APP for the State.
Mr. Machindra G. Dive, API, Vani Police Station, Nashik Rural,
present.

CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI,J.

DATED : SEPTEMBER 21, 2018.

P.C.

1. This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by the

aforesaid applicant apprehending his arrest in C.R.No. 104 of 2018

registered at Vani Police Station, District Nashik. for the offences

under Section 498A, 313, 323, 354(A)(D), 377, 504, 506, of IPC.

2. Heard Mr. Nikam the learned Counsel for the applicant and

Shri Agarkar, the learned APP for the State. I have perused the

record and considered the submissions advanced by the learned

Counsels for the respective parties.

pps 1 of 4
919 aba 1937-18.doc

3. The aforesaid crime was registered pursuant to the FIR lodged

by Snehal Lalit Gadkari. The FIR reveals that the first informant was

married to Lalit Gadkari on 14th December, 2015. The first informant

has alleged that soon after the marriage, her husband and his family

members started abusing and insulting her. The applicant herein is

the paternal uncle of Lalit Gadkari. The allegations against the

present applicant in the FIR are of general nature. However, in the

supplementary statement, the first informant had stated that the

applicant herein had outraged her modesty while her husband Lalit

was in Australia.

4. The records prima facie reveal that the father-in-law of the first

informant had already lodged a police complaint against her on 16 th

February, 2018. In the said complaint, it was alleged that Lalit was

employed in Australia and that the first informant was insisting that

he should take her to Australia and that she was harassing the family

members as he had not taken her to Australia. The records also

indicate that the husband of the first informant had already given

notice and thereafter filed divorce proceeding. The first information

report as well as the supplementary statement, wherein specific

pps 2 of 4
919 aba 1937-18.doc

allegations are made against the present applicant, are subsequent to

the filing of said divorce proceeding. The records therefore prima

facie indicate that the FIR is an offshoot of the said divorce

proceeding.

5. Considering the above facts and circumstances, in my

considered view, this is not a case which would justify custodial

interrogation. Furthermore, the applicant is a permanent resident of

Nashik, and there are no chances of the applicant absconding or

thwarting the course of justice. There are no criminal antecedents

against the applicant.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances, in my

considered view, this is a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail. Hence

the following order.

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) In the event of arrest of the applicant in Crime No. 104 of 2018

registered at Vani Police Station, District Nashik, the applicant be

released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees

Twentyfive Thousand Only) with one or two solvent sureties in the

pps 3 of 4
919 aba 1937-18.doc

like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer.

(iii) The applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer for a

period of four days from 1st October, 2018 from 11.00 a.m. to 2.00

p.m. and further as and when required by the Investigating Officer

for the purpose of investigation and interrogation.

(iv) The applicant shall not interfere with the complainant and the

other witnesses in any manner.

(v) The applicant shall provide his permanent as well as temporary

address, if any, and his contact details to the Investigating Officer.

(vi) The applicant shall not change his residential address without

prior intimation to the Investigation Officer.

(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Digitally signed
by Prasanna
Prasanna Pradeep
Pradeep Salgaonkar
Salgaonkar Date:
2018.09.25
11:53:35 +0530

pps 4 of 4

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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