Varsha Ramesh Taurani v. State Of Maharashtra

DAE 53-IA-3787-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3787 OF 2022 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1006 OF 2002 Varsha Ramesh Taurani ...Applicant

Versus

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

IN THE MATTER WETWEEN

The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant

Versus

1. Ramesh Sadhuram Taurani

2. Abdul Rashid Dawood Merchant

...Respondents

Mr. Apoorv V. Singh, Advocate for Applicant in IA. Mr. Ajay Patil, APP for Respondent/State in IA and Appellant in Appeal No.1006/2002.

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND PRAKASH D.NAIK, JJ.

by DNYANESHWAR ASHOK ETHAPE Date: 2022.12.13 18:26:11 +0530 DNYANESHWAR ASHOK ETHAPE DATE : 8th DECEMBER, 2022.

P.C.:- .

By the present Application, the Applicant, surety to the Respondent No.1 in Criminal Appeal No.1006 of 2002, has prayed that, her surety of Rs.10 lacs which is in form of Fixed Deposit Receipt, be returned to her as the Appeal preferred by State against the Respondent No.1 has been dismissed by this Court by its Judgment and Order dated 1st July 2021.

1/2

DAE 53-IA-3787-2022.doc 2.

Record indicates that, it is the fact that, the Applicant has deposited Rs.10 lacs by way of FDR as per Order dated 2nd May 2005, as and by way of surety of Respondent No.1 Ramesh Taurani. As the said Appeal has now been dismissed, there is no impediment in cancelling surety bond of the applicant and returning the said amount of Rs.10 lacs to her. 3.

In view of the above, we direct the Execution Department or any other Department attached to this High Court with whom the said amount of Rs. 10 lacs is lying, to refund it to the Applicant within a period of two weeks from date of production of the present Order. 4.

Application is allowed in the above terms.

5.

All the concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this Order. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (A. S. GADKARI, J.) 2/2