Bombay High CourtABA/240/2017allowed

Mahendra S/O. Anandrao Nimbarte v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Sakoli Dist. Bhandara

2017-06-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 aba240.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.240/2017 Mahendra S/o Anandrao Nimbarte ..Vs..

State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Police Station Sakoli, Distt. Bhandara - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri N.S. Khandewale, Adv. for the applicant. Shri N.R. Patil, A.P.P. for the respondent / State. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATE : 30.6.2017.

Heard.

The applicant, apprehending arrest in crime registered against him for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, has sought pre-arrest bail.

The crime is registered on complaint lodged by Kumari Devangana Chandewar that Shri Lanjewar had assured the husband of the complainant that the applicant will secure job for the complainant, however, for that amount of Rs.4,00,000/- will have to be paid to the applicant, that amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was given by husband of complainant to the applicant on 19th January, 2011 and amount of Rs.2,50,000/- is given to Santosh Lanjewar on 11th February, 2011 which amount is

2 aba240.17 received by the applicant.

The complaint is lodged on 8th March, 2017.

The applicant has stated that he had been Corporator from 2010 to 2015, Member of Senate of Nagpur University from 2005 to 2015, Member of Management Council, Nagpur University and is a law abiding citizen. The applicant has stated that he is not involved in any other crime / offence.

Considering the facts of the case and nature of accusations against the applicant and as the non-applicant has not been able to show that custody of the applicant is required for further investigation, the interim order passed by this Court on 21st April, 2017 granting protection to the applicant is confirmed. The application is allowed accordingly.

JUDGE Tambaskar.