Bombay High CourtABA/14/2017allowed

Pramod S/O. Bhaiyalalji Kutrahe v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O. Sakkardara Dist. Nagpur

2017-06-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 aba14.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.14/2017 Pramod S/o Bhaiyalalji Kutrahe ..Vs..

State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer Sakkardara, Distt. Nagpur - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri R.M. Daga, Advocate for the applicant.

Shri V.R. Thakre, A.P.P. for the respondent / State. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATE : 13.6.2017.

Heard.

Apprehending arrest in crime registered for offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail. The crime is registered on the complaint of Ramkishan Maroti Thakrel, father of deceased. According to the investigating agency, the applicant and deceased were in love and the applicant had assured the deceased that he will marry her, however, subsequently, the applicant intended to marry some other girl and, therefore, deceased consumed poison which proved to be fatal. The offence is registered against the applicant and his mother. The mother of the applicant is granted pre-arrest bail by the Sessions Court.

The applicant is working with the Indian Army and is presently posted at Jammu and Kashmir.

2 aba14.17 This Court has granted interim protection to the applicant by order passed on 16th January, 2017. Neither there is complaint by the investigating agency that the applicant has misused the interim protection nor the investigating agency has been able to show that the custody of applicant is required for further investigation. Considering the facts of the case, I am convinced that the interim protection granted by this Court by the order passed on 16th January, 2017 is required to be confirmed. The order is confirmed and the application is allowed accordingly.

JUDGE Tambaskar.