Girdharlal Nathubhai Dalal v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.959 OF 2016 Girdharlal Nathubhai Dalal .Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra & anr.

.Respondents Mr.Yashpal Jain a/w. Mr.Aditya Gore i/b.Oasis Counsel and Advisory, Advocate, for the Applicant Mrs.Rutuja Ambekar, APP, for the Respondent No.1 - State Mr.Aabad Ponda a/w. Mr.Varghare Thomas, Mr.H.Mehta i/b. Mr.J. Sagar Associates, Advocate, for the Intervenor CORAM :

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

DATE : 01.07.2016 P.C.

.

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant, learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 - State and the learned counsel for the Intervenor.

2.

Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that he has received a summons under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C., from the CBCID Police

Station, Pondicherry, asking him to join the investigation.

3.

Learned Counsel states that the applicant apprehends arrest in connection with C.R.No.10 of 2006 registered with the CBCID Police Station, Pondicherry, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel seeks transit bail in respect of the said C.R.No.10 of 2006.

4.

Learned counsel for the Intervenor and the learned APP have raised a preliminary objection. They submit that the appropriate authority would be the Pondicherry Court as the C.R. is registered in Pondicherry with the CBCID. Learned counsel for the Intervenor as well as the learned APP have no objection, if the Applicant is protected for a period of three weeks from today, to enable him to approach the

concerned Court, in order to seek appropriate relief. Accordingly, the Applicant shall not be arrested for a period of three weeks from today, within which time, he can approach the appropriate Court.

5.

Accordingly, the Application is disposed of on the aforesaid terms. As far as the condition No.2 imposed vide order dated 09.06.2016 in ABA No.959 of 2016 is concerned, the said condition is vacated and the Applicant is permitted to leave the jurisdiction of this Court.

6.

It is made clear, that this Court has not gone into the merits of this Application. All contentions of both the parties are kept open.

Parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)