SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Siddhivinayak Umesh Virdhe vs The State Of Maharashtra on 22 July, 2019

14-ABA 1132-19.odt



Siddhivinayak Umesh Virdhe …Applicant
State of Maharashtra …Respondent

• Mr. Sarang S. Aradhye, Advocate for the Applicant.
• Mr. Prashant Jadhav, APP for the State.
• Mr. Dattatray S. Nikam, API, Pandharpur City Police Station.

DATE : 22nd JULY, 2019

P.C. :

1. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with

CR No. 172/19 registered at Pandharpur City Police Station under

Sections 498-A, 417, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the SectionIPC.

2. The FIR is lodged by applicant’s wife. It is alleged in the FIR

that the applicant was physically incapable in consummating their

marriage. By suppressing this fact, applicant no. 1 still got married

with first informant and thus she was cheated. There are

allegations in the FIR that the applicant and his family members

were aware of his physical incapability and yet they did not inform

her about the same, hence, they were party to the cheating. There

Nikita Gadgil 1/4

::: Uploaded on – 23/07/2019 24/07/2019 01:00:13 :::
14-ABA 1132-19.odt

are other allegations of harassment. However, most of these

allegations arise from this basic allegation of suppression of this

important fact.

3. On the last occasion, this court vide order dated 24 th May

2019, had recorded that the applicant was willing to undergo

medical tests.

4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the medical

tests accordingly were conducted. I have perused the reports which

are produced by the investigating officer. The medical reports

support the applicant’s case that he is not suffering from any such

incapability as alleged in the FIR. The investigating officer is

present in the court. On his instructions, learned APP makes a

statement that since the medical examination is already

completed, his custody may not be necessary. The other

allegations are in respect of offence under Section 498A. The

allegations are general in nature and custodial interrogation

would not reveal anything further that what is mentioned in the

FIR. The investigation can go on. However, for that purpose

custody of the applicant is not necessary. In this view of the

Nikita Gadgil 2/4

::: Uploaded on – 23/07/2019 24/07/2019 01:00:13 :::
14-ABA 1132-19.odt

matter application is allowed. Hence, the following order:-


(i) In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R.
No. 172/19 registered at Pandharpur City Police Station, the
Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his 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.

(iii) Application stands disposed of accordingly.


Nikita Gadgil 3/4

::: Uploaded on – 23/07/2019 24/07/2019 01:00:13 :::

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