Shukraj S/O Pandurang Ghadge v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

-:(1):- FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Court's or Judge's orders.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 7072 OF 2014 SHUKRAJ S/O PANDURANG GHADGE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. More Abhijit S. APP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2: Mr. A. V. Deshmukh. *** CORAM: T. V. NALAWADE, J.

DATED: 27th FEBRUARY, 2015.

PER COURT:

1.

The application is filed for relief of anticipatory bail. 2, Both the sides are heard.

3.

The applicant is shown as absconding accused in a case filed for offence punishable under sections 379, 411, 427, 201 and 34 of I.P.C. The charge sheet came to be filed on 2nd April, 2014.

4.

The crime is registered on the basis of report given by owner of one tanker. On 15th October, 2013, the tanker was parked at Renuka Petrol Pump, Osmanabad as some repairs were to be done. On the next date i.e. 16th October, 2013 when the driver went there, he noticed that the tanker was

-:(2):- not present on the spot. Then, the report of theft was given. There is GPS System in the tanker and ultimately police traced the tanker. The scrap of the tanker was found at the brickkiln of the applicant. The land is standing in the name of father of the applicant. But, there is allegation against the applicant that he was involved in the racket. Scrap of many other vehicles were found. It appears that there was a racket formed for commission of theft of vehicles and they were demolishing the vehicles and they were making scrap and that way they were making money. In view of these circumstances, the charge sheet came to be filed for aforesaid offences.

5.

Immediately after the registration of the crime the applicant absconded. In such cases, custodial interrogation is must. Such instances are increasing. More offences can be traced during custodial interrogation. It is not a fit case to grant relief. The application is rejected.

[T. V. NALAWADE, J.] Dt.27/02/2015 ans/7072