Deepak Mangeram Sauda v. State Of Maharashtra

18.aba 3339.22.doc Urmila Ingale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION by URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Date:

2022.12.01 18:48:50 +0530 URMILA PRAMOD INGALE ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3339 OF 2022 Deepak Mangeram Sauda ..Applicant vs.

State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr. Tarang Sayed i/b Mr. Advait Tamhankar, for applicant. Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP for respondent-State.

Mr. Vishal Patil, API DCB CID, Unit -11 present. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

DATE : DECEMBER 1, 2022 P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP.

2.

Learned APP makes a grievance that despite giving notice under section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("CrPC", for short), the applicant has not reported and cooperated. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the offence is an outcome of a monetary transaction. An amount of Rs.5,00,000/-has been paid to the complainant. According to him, this is in the nature of a civil dispute

18.aba 3339.22.doc though the offence is registered under sections 420 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.

3.

A notice under section 41A of the CrPC has already been issued. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant will co-operate with the Investigating Officer and place all facts before him. Let the applicant appear before the Investigating Officer on 05/12/2022 and 06/12/2022 between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. and thereafter as and when called. In case if the Investigating Officer wants to effect the arrest if he feels that arrest is imperative in the wake of the reasons recorded by him, he may effect the arrest after giving 72 hours notice in advance to the applicant.

4.

The anticipatory bail application is disposed of. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)