Santosh Kashinath Raut And ANR v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.824 OF 2014 Santosh Kashinath Raut and Another ...Applicants vs.

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. J.M. Puranik, Advocate for the Applicants. Ms. A.T. Javeri, APP for the State.

CORAM : P.D. KODE, J.

DATE : JANUARY 12, 2015 P.C.

.

By the order dated 02-07-2014 the adinterim protection in terms of Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been granted in favour of the applicants. The prosecution has not filed any reply objecting the grant of such ad-interim protection.

2.

Considering the allegations in the complaint, it appears that the offence was allegedly committed in the year 2010. The evidence regarding the acts allegedly committed by the 1/3

applicants is embodied in the documents. Hence, it is difficult to perceive that the custodial interrogation of the applicants would be necessary for the completion of investigation. Upon a specific query made to learned APP, she was not able to pinpoint any aspect which is remained to be investigated for want of custodial interrogation of the applicants.

3.

Resultantly, the application is allowed.

The ad-interim direction given by my predecessor is hereby confirmed on earlier terms and conditions with the modification that now the applicants shall attend the investigating officer on every Monday in between 4.00 pm to 6.00 pm for a period of one month and thereafter on alternate Monday and on a particular day for which he would be summoned by the investigating officer.

4.

Application stands disposed of.

2/3

5.

Later on learned APP files an affidavit as directed by the Court. The same is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. Place the matter for direction on 20-01-2015.

(P.D. KODE, J.) 3/3