Smt. Grace Ashok Thakkar v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4834 OF 2015 Smt. Grace Ashok Thakkar & Anr.
... Applicants
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
... Respondents ..........
Mr Vinod Patil, Advocate for the applicants Mr S. M. Ganachari, APP for respondent/State .............
ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6253 OF 2015 Smt. Grace Ashok Thakkar ... Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
... Respondents ..........
Mr Vinod Patil, Advocate for the applicants Mr S. M. Ganachari, APP for respondent/State .............
ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6254 OF 2015 Kishor Sahebrao Chavan.
... Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
... Respondents ..........
Mr Vinod Patil, Advocate for the applicants Mr S. M. Ganachari, APP for respondent/State .............
ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6258 OF 2015 Kishor Sahebrao Chavan ... Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
... Respondents ..........
Mr Vinod Patil, Advocate for the applicants Mr S. M. Ganachari, APP for respondent/State .............
ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4832 OF 2015 Smt. Grace Ashok Thakkar ... Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
... Respondents ..........
Mr Vinod Patil, Advocate for the applicants Mr S. J. Salgare, APP for respondent/State .............
CORAM :
N. W. SAMBRE, J.
DATE : 8TH JANUARY, 2016.
PER COURT:
.
All these applications are moved by the applicants seeking cancellation of bail granted by the ld. Sessions Court in Crime Nos. 16 of 2015 registered at Deopur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 40 of 2015 registered at Deopur Police Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 406, 408, 420, 107 of the Indian Penal Code and 85 of 2015 registered at Deopur Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 495, 496 r/w 34 o the Indian Penal Code. 2.
The learned Counsel for the applicant/complainant made a common submission and would vehemently urge that all the nonapplicants/accused have played fraud and cheated the present applicant. He has also invited my attention to the certain documents wherein the applicant is shown to have been married to accused Ashok s/o Manubhai Thakkar. According to applicant, the other accused persons though were aware about the same, have suppressed the same and rather instigated the second marriage. He would then urge that, it is during the audit of the non-applicants' company, fraud was noticed which has prompted the applicant to file the complaint.
3.
According to learned counsel for applicants, in addition the family members and her so called husband of complainant were instrumental in cheating her and removing jewellery and cash from her custody.
4.
With the assistance of the learned Counsel, I have perused the entire case papers.
5.
The ld. Sessions Court particularly in the background of existing differences (dispute between the applicant, her husband Ashok and family members) has proceeded to grant pre-arrest bail on the ground that the custodial interrogation is not necessary. 6.
Admittedly, it is not brought to the notice of this Court that the accused persons have not complied with the bail conditions. In my opinion, in view of the fact that the Sessions Court has already exercised the discretion in favour of the accused person in granting pre-arrest bail, no case for interference is made out. As such, applications fail and same stand rejected.
[ N. W. SAMBRE ] JUDGE sgp