Dnyandev Dhondiba Shelke And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra

Sherla V.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.729 OF 2015 Shri Dnyandev Dhondiba Shelke & Ors.

... Applicants Vs.

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.C.S. Joshi for the Applicants Mr.Arfan Sait, APP, for Respondent - State Mr.H.R. Ghuge, PSI, Indira Nagar police station, Nasik City - present CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

DATE: JUNE 16, 2015 P.C.:

1.

The application is moved by these applicants/accused, who are prosecuted for the offences punishable under sections 143, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 135 of the Mumbai Police Act. The crime is registered at C.R. No.63 of 2015 with the Indira Nagar police station, Nasik. One Alok Satyanarayan Chaturvedi, an officer from the Cipla company has given a complaint. It is the case of the prosecution that on 11.4.2015, between 12 noon to 1.45pm, the officers of the Cipla company were conducting a walk-in interview in one hotel Surya, Nasik. At that time, the applicants/accused alongwith the other accused entered the interview room and abused complainant and others. They tried to interfere in the interview process. They threatened the officers 1 / 3

from the Cipla company of their lives and tore off important documents. They also threatened the candidates and assaulted them. 2.

The learned Counsel for the applicants/accused has submitted that the applicants/accused are employees of one Milan Company and they had booked a room on the second floor of the hotel Surya on the same day for a meeting of their company. He submitted that in the walk-in interview, which was going on the first floor, there was a lot of kiosk and disturbance was caused in the meetings and, therefore, the applicants/accused came out and requested the officers of the Cipla company to keep silence. However, there was a verbal altercation and then subsequently the complaint was lodged against these officers. He submitted that they are officers; have no criminal record and the complaint was also registered 3 days after the incident. 3.

The learned Prosecutor has opposed the application. He submitted that the officer has recorded the statements of the officials of the Cipla company, who have corroborated the complainant that these applicants/accused have abused and assaulted their candidates at the time of the interview.

4.

Perused the complaint, the statements of the witnesses. It appears prima facie that suddenly the incident of altercation has taken place. No custodial interrogation is required in this case. Considering the nature of 2 / 3

the offence and the manner in which it has taken place, I grant pre-arrest bail to the applicants as under:

i) In the event of arrest, the applicants/accused shall be released on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each, with one or two sureties in the like amount; ii) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence; iii) The applicants shall not indulge into any kind of offence while on bail;

iv) The applicants shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer and attend the concerned police station on 22nd June, 2015 and 29th June, 2015 between 5 pm to 6 pm.

5.

Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) 3 / 3