Shaikh Lukman Shaikh Rasul v. State Of Maharashtra, Through P.S.O. Telhara, Akola And Others

2906appln2.15.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPLN) NO.2/2015 Shaikh Lukman Shaikh Rasul ...Versus...

State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Telhara, Distt. Akola and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri J.B. Gandhi, Advocate for applicant Shri M.J. Khan, APP for respondent no.1 Shri S.J. Jagirdar, Advocate for respondent nos.2 to 5 CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI, J.

DATE : 29.06.2015 Heard the learned Counsel for the rival parties. This is an application for cancellation of anticipatory bail order that was made in favour of the respondent nos.2 to 5. Admittedly, the respondent nos.2 to 5 are not said to have any direct role in the offence under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The allegations are that the respondent nos.2 to 5 had abetted the kidnapping etc.

The learned Counsel for the applicant contended that there are threats and the report accordingly was lodged to the police station.

Looking at the role of the respondent nos.2 to 5, against whom there is no direct allegation about the offence being committed under the Protection of Children from Sexual

2906appln2.15.odt Offences, Act, I do not think there is any occasion to cancel the bail granted in their favour in December, 2014. That being so, I make the following order.

ORDER

Criminal Application No.2/2015 is rejected.

JUDGE Wadkar