Deepali Bhushan More v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

acb20.21 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPLICATION FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL NO.20 OF 2021 Deepali Bhushan More ...APPLICANT

VERSUS

1) The State of Maharashtra,

2) Dinkar Bhaskarrao More,

3) Kamal Dinkar More,

4) Vrushali Jayesh Kore ...RESPONDENTS ...

Mr.A.R. Syed Advocate for Applicant.

Mr.N.T. Bhagat, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State. Mr.A.R. Devkate Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4. ...

CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.

DATE : 24th JANUARY, 2022 ORDER :

1.

Learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits that Respondent No.2 expired on 3rd January 2022.

acb20.21 2.

Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant submits that charge-sheet is filed.

3.

It is to be noted that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 appear to be the parents-in-law and Respondent No.4 is the married sisterin-law. The offence under which the First Information Report lodged by the applicant was under Section 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and anticipatory bail was granted to Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon on 2nd January 2021. In fact when there are directions in Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar and another, (2014) 8 SCC 273 in respect of offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code are concerned, then the reasons those have been stated by the learned Additional Sessions Judge while granting anticipatory bail appear to be correct. No necessity to interfere. Application stands rejected.

[ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI , J. ] asb/JAN22