Sandeep Baldeorao Sawle v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O. Kingaon Police Station Dist. Buldhana

1 aba310.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.310/2017 Sandeep Baldeorao Sawle ..Vs..

The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer Kingaon, Police Station, Distt. Buldana - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri M.N.Ali, Adv. for the applicant.

Shri A.D. Sonak, A.P.P. for the respondent / State. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATE : 11.7.2017.

Heard.

Apprehending arrest in connection with crime registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 468, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail.

The crime is registered on the complaint lodged by Kapil Thorave that assuring to secure a job in Food Corporation of India for the complainant's son, co-accused Krushnakant Bagde and Rameshwar Band have duped him of Rs.8,00,000/-.

The facts on record show that the complainant Kapil Thorave has not named the applicant in his complaint and the applicant is shown as co-accused as according to the investigating agency

2 aba310.17 Kunal Padmane has given a statement that the applicant was also involved in duping the people alognwith co-accused Krushnakant Bagde and Rameshwar Band. The learned Advocate for the applicant has pointed out that Krushnakant Bagde is released on bail. This Court has granted protection to the applicant by order passed on 9th May, 2017 imposing condition of attendance at the police station. The investigating agency has not complained that the applicant has not co-operated with it. The non-applicant has not been able to show that custody of the applicant is required for further investigation.

In the facts of the case, the order passed by this Court on 9th May, 2017 granting protection to the applicant is confirmed. However, condition of attending the police station on every Monday and Thursday as imposed by the order passed on 9th May, 2017 is relaxed. The application is allowed in the above terms.

JUDGE Tambaskar.