Mahadev @ Madhav Tukaram Kamble v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
2024:BHC-AUG:18878 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 67 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1095 OF 2024 Mahadev @ Madhav Tukaram Kamble
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra and others ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Rahul R. Karpe APP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2: Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Ms. Ashwini Lomte .....
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATED : 19th AUGUST, 2024.
PER COURT :- 1.
The applicant apprehends arrest in connection with crime No.384 of 2024 registered with Vivekanand Chowk Police Station, district Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 294, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2.
It is the prosecution's case that the informant's husband has availed the loan from Shriram Finance Company for purchase of four wheeler. It is alleged that the installments of the said loan amount were due. It is alleged that on 12.6.2024 at about 12.15 p.m. the informant had received a call on her mobile from Shriram Finance Company, as her husband's mobile was not in working condition. It is alleged that after some time the applicant and other persons from Shriram Finance Company came to the house of the informant and
-2abused the informant and her husband. It is alleged that the applicant pull the hands of the informant and outraged her modesty. 3.
It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case to avoid the loan repayment of Shriram Finance Company. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant had gone to the house of the informant to ask the informant's husband to pay the loan amount. Considering the allegations against the applicant, his custodial interrogation is not required and requested to allow the application. 4.
It is the contention of the learned APP alongwith learned counsel for respondent No.3 that the applicant outraged the modesty of the informant. The applicant had gone to the house of the informant. He abused the informant in filthy language. Considering the allegations against the applicant, his custodial interrogation is required and requested to reject the application. 5.
I have heard all the learned counsel. Perused the F.I.R. and the police papers produced on record. The allegation against the applicant is that he outraged the modesty of the informant by pulling her hand and he abused the informant in filthy language. The applicant is an employee of Finance Company from whom the
-3informant's husband had taken loan for purchase of four wheeler. Considering the allegations against the applicant, his custodial interrogation is not required and I pass the following order :-
O R D E R
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) The interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 05.07.2024 stands confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
6.
Since Ms. Ashwini Lomte, the learned counsel is appointed to represent the respondent No.3, her legal fees and expenses are quantified at Rs.5000/- to be paid by the High Court Legal Services Sub Committee, Aurangabad.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) rlj/