Reeta Tahasildar Gaud v. The State Of Maharashtra

: 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1716 OF 2021 Reeta Tahasildar Gaud .... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ______ Smt. Geeta Singh for Applicant.

Mr. S. S. Pednekar, APP for State/Respondent. ______ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 26th JULY, 2021 (Through Video Conferencing) P.C. :

1.

The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No. 1132 of 2019 registered at Sakinaka Police Station, under sections 326, 324, 323 and 504 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'

).

2.

Heard Smt. Geeta Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri. Pednekar, learned APP for the State. 3.

The First Information Report (for short '

F.I.R.) is lodged by one Vikram Yadav. He has stated that, on 24/12/2019 there was some quarrel between the first informant and one Vishal Gokhale

: 2 :

Gor, who was applicant'

s son. The quarrel went on for some time.

It is alleged that the applicant'

s son abused the informant and beat him with hand. At that time, the applicant came there and she also abused the informant. In the meantime, one Nisha Singh, who was residing in the same lane, also started abusing the informant. The applicant's son Vishal called one Moin. He came there and assaulted the first informant, his brother Rajesh and sister Nirmala. In the incident, the informant suffered fracture of his left ring finger. On this basis the F.I.R. was lodged.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, no role is attributed to the present applicant concerning section 326 of IPC. She submitted that the incident is a petty incident and it had occurred on a spur of moment. The incident is of December 2019 and the applicant'

s custodial interrogation is not necessary.

5.

Learned APP opposed this application on the basis of statements made in the F.I.R.

6.

I have considered these submissions. The incident is old. It has occurred suddenly on the issue of parking of vehicles. The applicant had come there after the quarrel had started and

: 3 :

had only abused him. The main incident of causing fracture had taken place afterwards. The applicant'

s son Vishal had called one Moin who come with a bamboo and gave blow of that bamboo causing fracture to ring finger of the informant. Considering the applicant's very minor role, minor nature of the incident and the fact that it had taken place in December 2019, custodial interrogation of the applicant is absolutely not necessary. She can be protected by an order of anticipatory bail. 7.

Hence, the following order :

ORDER

(i) In the event of her arrest in connection with C.R.No. 1132 of 2019 registered at Sakinaka Police Station, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on her furnishing P. R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) Application stands disposed of accordingly. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)