Shantappa Chandramappa Hegonde v. The State Of Maharashtra

IRESH SIDDHARAM MASHAL Date: 2021.09.02 17:14:11 +0530 IRESH SIDDHARAM MASHAL ISM

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 920 OF 2019 SHANTAPPA CHANDRAMAPPA HEGONDE ....APPLICANT V/s.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA .....RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2019 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 920 OF 2019 RAFIK RAJEBHAI MUJAWAR ....PETITIONER

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

SHANTAPPA CHANDRAMAPPA HEGONDE ....APPLICANT V/s.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA .....RESPONDENT Mr. Rajaram V. Bansode for the applicant Ms. Sharmila S. Kaushik APP for the State Mr. Mohammad S. Mulla for complainant-intervenor CORAM :

NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE:

AUGUST 31, 2021.

P.C.:

1] On 16/04/2019, while issuing notice, this court granted ad1/5

interim protection in favour of applicant in C.R. No. 32/2019 registered with non-applicant for offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

2] Heard Shri. Bansode, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Kaushik, learned APP assisted by Mr. Mohammad Mulla for the complainant.

3] Mr. Bansode for the complainant would urge that apart from unexplained delay in lodging F.I.R., he would claim that matter of civil nature twisted with colour of offence in question. According to him, applicant is already on ad-interim protection. According to him, applicant is already on ad-interim protection for last two orders and that being so, he deserves protection in the matter. 4] Learned APP informs that a separate offence was registered against the applicant for issuing threats to the complainant. She would further claim that in the said matter, applicant is already released on bail. Counsel for the complainant would urge that apart 2/5

from the offence of issuing threats to the complainant, another NC is also registered.

5] With the assistance of respective counsel, I have perused contents of F.I.R. Offence is based on complaint dated 25/01/2019 in which it is claimed that in 2010 applicant has agreed to sell his land for a valid consideration in favour of complainant for which he has accepted consideration on 16/12/2013.

6] Admittedly, in support of allegations of F.I.R., no civil proceedings are taken recourse to by complainant. What is claimed is, amount was paid in cash and eye witnesses to the said incident are relied on for registration of offence in question. 7] Be that as it may, perusal of the contents in the F.I.R. depicts that nature of allegations against the applicant rest on the foundation of a civil dispute as the offence is claimed to have been committed in the discharge of contractual obligation.

Applicant is a public servant as he is working as primary school 3/5

teacher.

8] As far as consideration paid is concerned, it is always open for the complainant to seek specifc performance or recovery of the amount.

9] So far as the issue of threat is concerned, applicant is already released on bail in the separate charge-sheet fled against the applicant.

10] In the aforesaid background, ad-interim protection ordered on 16/04/2019 stands confrmed with following conditions: (i) In the event of arrest in C.R. 32 of 2019 registered with Akkalkot South police station, District Solapur, applicant be released on bail on furnishing P. R. bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.

(ii) Applicant shall attend the Investigating Offcer on 4/5

04/09/2021, 06/09/2021 and 08/09/2021 between 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon and thereafter as and when directed.

(iii) Applicant shall not infuence the witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner.

(iv) Liberty to move for cancellation in case if the threat perception persists.

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.] 5/5