Vandana Tejas Ughade v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2024:BHC-AUG:20918 210.2022ACB.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

986 APPLICATION FOR CANCELLATION OF BAIL NO. 210 OF VANDANA TEJAS UGHADE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Choudhari N. L.

APP for Respondent/State : Mr.P.P. Dawalkar Advocates for Respondent nos.2 to 8 : Mr.Siddiqui Ahmed Mushfiq and Mr.S. B. Khan ...

CORAM :

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

4th September, 2024.

P.C.:

1.

The applicant is seeking cancellation of bail in Crime No.462 of 2022 registered with Dhule City Police Station, for the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 323, 354-A, 354-B, 354-C, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (For short, "IPC") granted to respondent nos.2 to 8.

2.

It is contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant had lodged complaint against respondent nos.2 to 8 under the above referred sections. Respondent nos.2 to 8 have been released on bail by the learned Sessions Court. Considering the allegations against respondent nos.2 to 8, their custodial interrogation is required but this fact is not considered by the learned Sessions Court and requested to allow the application and cancel the bail of respondent nos.2 to 8.

210.2022ACB.odt 3.

It is contention of the learned counsel for respondent nos.2 to 8 that investigation is completed. Charge-sheet has been filed against respondent nos.2 to 8. Considering the allegations against respondents, their custodial interrogation is not required and requested to reject the application.

4.

The learned APP submitted that bail granted to the respondent nos.2 to 8 be cancelled.

5.

I have heard all the learned counsel. Perused the F.I.R. and charge-sheet.

6.

The allegations against respondent nos.2 to 8 are that they have outraged the modesty of the informant and recorded it in mobile. During investigation, the police has seized the mobile used in the crime. Charge-sheet is filed against all the respondents. As investigation is completed, custodial interrogation of respondent nos.2 to 8 is not required and I pass the following order :-

ORDER

(i) The application is rejected.

[ SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. ] sga