SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Uttam Khandu Bangar And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra on 25 November, 2019

20-ABA-1416-19.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1416 OF 2019

1. Uttam Khandu Bangar
Age: 60 years, Occu.: Retired,
R/o Flat No.2, Shreeman Society,
Karve Nagar, Pune

2. Anita Uttam Bangar
Age: 56 years, Occu.: Service as Teacher,
R/o Flat No.2, Shreeman Society,
Karve Nagar, Pune ..APPLICANTS

VERSUS
State of Maharashtra
Through Tofkhana Police Station,
Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar. ..RESPONDENT

….
Mr. A.V. Patil Indrale, Advocate for applicants
Mr. V.S. Badakh, A.P.P. for respondent – State
Mr. N.B. Narwade, Advocate for informant
….

CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT, J.
DATED : 25th NOVEMBER, 2019

PER COURT :

This is an application under Section 438 of Code of Criminal

Procedure. The applicants claim to have an apprehension of being arrested in

connection with Crime No. 1352 of 2019 registered with Tofkhana Police

Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 498A,

Section406, Section323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

1 / 4

::: Uploaded on – 27/11/2019 27/11/2019 23:27:01 :::
20-ABA-1416-19.odt

2. Heard. Perused First Information Report (“F.I.R.” for short) and

related papers.

3. The applicants are parent in laws of the informant. She lodged

F.I.R. on 20th September, 2019 stating therein that she married Avinash

Bangar, son of the applicants, in December, 2015. In marriage, 31 tolas of

gold was given towards dowry as it was demanded by the applicants. After

having stayed at matrimonial home for fifteen days, informant and her

husband went to California. Avinash started ill treating the informant in

California. He asked her to bring Rs.50 lacs from her parents for purchase of

property in America. She related all these things to the applicants. Instead of

reminding their son, the applicants told the informant that Avinash was right

in dealing with her and making the demand. The applicants too asked the

informant to bring money from her parents. Therefore, on 01 st June, 2019,

sum of Rs.9 lacs were deposited in the bank account of Avinash.

4. Further allegations in the F.I.R. suggests as to how the informant

had been ill-treated by the applicants and their son – Avinash. It is evident

from the F.I.R. that Avinash initiated proceeding for dissolution of marriage

on 13th August, 2019 in the Court of California. The informant had,

therefore, returned India on 02nd September, 2019. She then lodged F.I.R.

against the applicants and their son alleging therein that they refused to

return 37 tolas of gold and Rs.9 lakhs.

2 / 4

::: Uploaded on – 27/11/2019 27/11/2019 23:27:01 :::
20-ABA-1416-19.odt

5. After the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected application

moved by the applicants for anticipatory bail, the applicants returned 37 tolas

of gold and sum of Rs.9 lakhs as well. As such, recovery of the articles has

been made.

6. Learned Counsel for the informant would submit that some more

amount is due from the applicants and their son. However, there is no

support in the F.I.R. to what has been submitted by learned Counsel across

the bar.

7. As regards the allegations of ill-treatment are concerned, it is the

matter of oral evidence. No custodial interrogation of the applicants is

required. Application is, therefore, allowed in terms of the following order :-

ORDER

(I) In the event of arrest of the applicants in connection
with Crime No. 1352 of 2019 registered with Tofkhana Police
Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under
Sections 498A, Section406, Section323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, the applicants be released on executing P.R. bond in the
sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each with surety in
the like amount.

(II) The applicants shall appear before the investigating
officer, as and when required for the investigating purpose.

3 / 4

::: Uploaded on – 27/11/2019 27/11/2019 23:27:01 :::
20-ABA-1416-19.odt

(III) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence.

( R.G. AVACHAT, J. )
SSD

4 / 4

::: Uploaded on – 27/11/2019 27/11/2019 23:27:01 :::

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