Mangala Jagjitsingh Tinna v. The State Of Maharashtra
906-aba-1431.17.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1431 OF 2017 Mangala Jagjitsingh Tinna ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent .....
Mr. Pawan Mali i/b Prashant Thombre for the Applicant. Smt. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the State.
.....
CORAM :
A. S. GADKARI, J.
DATE : 08th FEBRUARY, 2018.
P. C.
1.
By an order dated 10th August, 2017, the applicant was granted interim relief.
2.
Perused the record of investigation.
It is the prosecution case that the first informant on earlier occasion had lodged a crime against the husband of the applicant under Sections 376, 354 and 507 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012. That the husband of the applicant was subsequently released on bail. That the husband of the applicant used to blackmail the first informant and pressuris her to withdraw the said case. It is alleged that on 29/07/2017, Shridhar Sutar
906-aba-1431.17.doc for attending the Court proceedings when the first informant along with her mother and other relatives was proceeding towards the Court premises from gate No.3, the applicant and her husband abused the first informant in filthy language and threatened them. When the father and brother of the first informant came at the spot, a scuffle took place, which was rescued by the police on duty. It is alleged that in the said scuffle an offence as contemplated under Section 354 of IPC has taken place. 3.
After perusing the record, it prima-facie appears that the applicant has not taken any active part in the said crime and she has no role to play in the alleged offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and it has her husband, who has committed the said act.
4.
In view of above, interim relief granted by this Court by an order dated 10th August, 2017 is hereby confirmed. 5.
Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. ( A. S. GADKARI, J. ) Shridhar Sutar