Kapil Gajaanan Shukal v. The State Of Maharashtra

Sherla V.

aba.814.2016+_902.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.814 OF 2016 Shri Kapil Gajanan Shukal ... Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent with ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.815 OF 2016 Shir Amit Babulal Kothari ... Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.R.U. Singh i/b Dinesh Pandey for the Applicants Ms.P.P. Shinde, APP, for Respondent - State Mr.Sandeep Nigade, API, Bhiwandi Crime Branch - present CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

DATE: MAY 5, 2016 P.C.:

1.

These two Anticipatory Bail Applications are moved by the applicants-accused as they are facing prosecution for the offences punishable under sections 420, 504, 506(2) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code in C.R. No.I-181 of 2016 registered with Narpoli police station, Thane on 13.4.2016 at the instance of one Vishal Narayan Jajodiya. 2.

The learned Counsel for the applicants submits that this being a case under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code where the punishment is 1 / 2

aba.814.2016+_902.doc less than 7 years, notice under section 41 A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is required to be given.

3.

Learned Prosecutor on instructions from the Investigating Officer, submits that notice under section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could not be issued because the applicants did not remain present at the police station to accept the notice.

4.

Under such circumstances, the police are directed to give them notice and follow the procedure laid under section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure tomorrow. The applicants-accused are directed to attend the police station tomorrow. In the event the police decides to arrest the applicants-accused, they shall give the applicants a 72-hours prior notice.

5.

Anticipatory Bail Applications are disposed of. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) 2 / 2