SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Subodh Harishchandra Rasal vs The State Of Maharashtra on 6 October, 2018

24 aba 1480-18.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1480 OF 2018

Subodh Harishchandra Rasal ..Applicant

v/s.

The State of Maharashtra . ..Respondents

Ms. Sapana Rachure for the Applicant.
Mr. S.R.Agarkar, APP for the State.
Mr. D.P.Mane, Police Constable, Khandeshwar Police Stn., Navi
Mumbai, present.

CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI,J.

DATED : OCTOBER 06, 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. 156 of 2018

registered at Khandeshwar Police Station for offences under Section

498A and 406 r/w.34 of IPC.

2. Heard Ms. Rachure, the learned Counsel for the applicant and

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

records and considered the submissions advanced by the learned

Counsel for the respective parties.

pps 1 of 4
24 aba 1480-18.doc

3. The applicant herein was married to first informant Yogita

Rasal in the year 2012. They have a daughter from the said

wedlock. Said Yogita Rasal lodged the first information report

alleging that since her marriage, the applicant and his family

members have been demanding dowry and subjecting her to cruelty.

She has further stated that in the year 2018 the applicant and his

family members drove her and her daughter out of the matrimonial

house. Based on the said FIR the aforesaid crime has been registered

against the applicant, his parents, brothers and other family

members.

4. The records prima facie reveal that there is matrimonial distort

between the applicant and his wife. The applicant herein had issued

a legal notice dated 26th May, 2017. The said notice prima facie

indicates that the first informant has been residing with her parents

since 18.9.2015. The applicant herein had also lodged a complaint

before the Head of the Community alleging that the first informant

had left the house on 18 th September, 2015 and that she has refused

to return. The records prima facie reveal that the first informant had

lodged a report on 1st July, 2018. The material on record indicates

pps 2 of 4
24 aba 1480-18.doc

that the first informant was residing with her parents for over three

years prior to lodging of the FIR and that during these three years

she had not lodged any complaint against the applicant and his

family members. Furthermore, a perusal of the FIR prima facie

reveals that the allegations leveled against the applicant are general

in nature.

5. The applicant was granted interim bail by order dated 25 th July,

2018. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the

applicant has already reported to the Investigating Officer and that

he has been interrogated. The learned APP also submitted that the

investigation is almost concluded and that the chargesheet will be

filed within 15 days.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances, in my

considered view, the presence of the applicant is not required for

custodial interrogation. The applicant is a permanent resident of

Panvel and there are no chances of his absconding or thwarting the

course of justice. There are no criminal antecedents against the

applicant.

7. Considering the above facts and circumstances, the application

pps 3 of 4
24 aba 1480-18.doc

is allowed on following terms and conditions:-

(i) In the event of arrest of the applicant in Crime No.156 of 2018

registered at Khandeshwar Police Station, the applicant be released

on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twentyfive

Thousand Only) with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount,

to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer.

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

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

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

prior intimation to the Investigation Officer.

(iv) The applicant shall not interfere with the complainant and the
Prasanna
Pradeep other witnesses in any manner
Salgaonkar
Digitally signed by
Prasanna Pradeep
Salgaonkar
Date: 2018.10.09
15:19:48 +0530 (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

pps 4 of 4

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh