← Library
Bombay High CourtACB/204/2022disposed off

Shyamsundar Vishwas Kakade v. Narayan Dashrath Gaike And Another

2022-11-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice N. B. Suryawanshi2 pages

{1} 936-ACB-204-2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPLICATION FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL NO.204 OF 2022 Shyamsundar Vishwas Kakade ...Applicant

Versus

Narayan Dashrath Gaike And Another

...Respondents

Mr. S.M. Kamble, Advocate for the applicant.

Mrs. P.V. Diggikar, APP for State.

.......

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.] DATE : 11 th NOVEMBER, 2022 ORDER :

1.

Heard.

2.

By this application the informant challenges the order passed by the Sessions Court, Aurangabad thereby granting protection to respondent No. 1 under section 438 of Cr.P.C. 3.

At the instance of applicant Crime No. 150/2022 is registered at Begumpura Police Station for the offences punishable under section 306, 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC, against five accused persons. Respondent No. 1 is arrayed as accused No. 5 in the FIR. The applicant-informant has Bhagyawant Punde

{2} 936-ACB-204-2022 lodged FIR alleging that accused No. 1 to 5 abeted suicide of his sister deceased Savita. It is alleged that on account of illicit relations between accused No. 1 and accused No. 2, Savita was ill treated and harassed. Whenever she used to go to lodge complaint against accused No. 1 to 4, respondent No. 1 used to call and tell the police officer concerned to register her complaint in a particular manner. This is the only allegation against respondent No. 1.

4.

In the entire FIR, there is no material to show that respondent No. 1 abeted, induced or instigated suicide of deceased Savita. Respondent No. 1 is a police officer. After going through investigation papers, Sessions Court has granted anticipatory bail to respondent No. 1.

5.

Having heard the learned advocate for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, I am of the opinion that there is no substance in the application. The Sessions Court has rightly granted anticipatory bail to respondent No. 1. Application being merit less is therefore rejected.

[NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.] Bhagyawant Punde