Kisan Maruti Satav And ORS. v. The State Of Maharashtra
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1189 OF 2020
1. Kisan Maruti Satav
2. Nanda Kisan Satav
3. Nishiganda Kisan Satav
4. Kajal Anant Satav .... Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ______ Mr. Anil S. Shitole for Applicants.
Ms. P. N. Dabholkar, APP for State/Respondent. Mr. Shinde, Sr. P. I. Baramati Police Station, present. ______ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 14th JANUARY, 2021 P.C. :
1.
The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No. 123 of 2020 registered at Baramati City Police Station, Dist. Pune, on 09/03/2020, under sections 354, 395, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC' ).
2.
The First Information Report (for short '
F.I.R.) is lodged by one Sunita Satav. She has stated in her F.I.R. that, on Gokhale
: 2 :
07/03/2020 her sons Tushar and Sandeep had gone to the house of the applicants for extending invitation for engagement ceremony of the informant'
s nephew Shishir. They were abused that time. It is alleged that, on 08/03/2020 the first informant along with her husband Trimbak, sons Tushar and Sandeep went to the house of applicants. The applicant Nos.1 to 3 are from the same family. Applicant No.4 is daughter in law of applicant No.1. The informant questioned the applicants as to why her sons were abused. It is alleged that, at that time, the applicant No.1 outraged her modesty and assaulted her. Other accused also assaulted her and removed her golden chain and another ornaments. Two unknown persons threatened Tushar at the point of knife. On this basis, the F.I.R. was lodged.
3.
Heard Shri. Anil Shitole, learned counsel for the applicants and Ms. Pallavi Dabholkar, learned APP for the State. 4.
It appears that the informant and the applicants are related to each other. The applicants on their part have filed their own F.I.R. through the applicant Kajal Satav against the informant's family under various sections of I.P.C. viz. 392, 354,
: 3 :
452 etc. There are similar allegations of taking away golden ornaments etc.
5.
On the last occasion, on 07/01/2021 this court (Coram: Smt. Bharati Dangre, J.) had directed the learned APP to take instructions from the I.O. as to whether it was possible to conduct the investigation in both the F.I.Rs. together instead of seeking custody of the accused. In effect, it was suggested that, if it is so possible to settle the matter, then investigation could proceed in that direction.
6.
Today the learned APP, on instructions, makes a statement that the first informant'
s group in this matter i.e. Sunita Satav and others did not attend the police station. The applicants have attended the police station and co-operated with the investigation. The investigating officer Shri. Shinde, Sr. P. I. Baramati police station has instructed the learned APP to make a statement that, in view of co-operation extended by the applicants, their custodial interrogation is not necessary. Based on this statement, protection of anticipatory bail can be granted to the applicants.
: 4 :
7.
Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) In the event of their arrest in connection with C.R.No. 123 of 2020 registered at Baramati City Police Station, Dist. Pune, the applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing PR bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand each Only) with one or two sureties each in the like amount. (ii) Application stands disposed of accordingly. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)