Nikita D/O. Narayan Ghodke v. The State Of Maharashtra

11-aba-186-2022.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 11 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.186 OF 2022 NIKITA D/O. NARAYAN GHODKE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Gavhad Dhananjay R. APP for Respondent - State : Mr. B. V. Virdhe ...

CORAM

:SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.

DATE : 21.02.2022 ORDER :- .

Present application has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.76 of 2021 registered with City Chowk Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

Heard learned Advocate for the applicant.

3.

Learned APP strongly opposes for grant of interim relief. He submits that the matter is coming for the first time and he is yet to receive the papers. However, the contents of the FIR are sufficient to state that papers put a bigger conspiracy involving this Court also and the name of the present applicant has been specifically mentioned. The (1)

11-aba-186-2022.odt accused persons named in the FIR appeared to be in the process of getting employment. Though there was absolutely no advertisement for the post, yet first letter is regarding the list of the candidates, whose names will have to be mentioned in the selection list and the second letter appears to be giving directions that the oath of 12 candidates to be held on 15.02.2021. Further, in respect of co-accused, even the letter added the appointment letter and on these documents, there are signatures of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad. There is also a letter, which appears to be or pretended to be issued by this Court and also by the Fire Fighting Services, Main Office, Mumbai. The signature of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad is stated to be forged.

Therefore, taking into consideration the allegations and also when this Court is also tried to be involved in the matter, this cannot be said to be the fit case where the extraordinary powers of this Court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised and, therefore, even at this stage, the application stands rejected.

[SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] scm (2)