Ganeshprashad S/O. Hamratlal Suryavanshi v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Police Station Katol Dist. Nagpur

1 ABA311.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.311/2017 Ganeshprashad S/o Hamratlal Suryavanshi ..Vs..

The State of Maharashtra, through its P.S.O., P.S. Katol, 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 P.K. Bezalwar, Adv. for the applicant.

Shri T.A. Mirza, A.P.P. for the respondent / State. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATE : 12.7.2017.

Heard.

Apprehending arrest in connection with crime registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicant has sought pre-arrest bail.

The crime is registered on the complaint lodged by the wife of the applicant that the applicant had been constantly demanding the amount from her parents, the applicant regularly harassed the complainant and on the date of the incident, the applicant picked up quarrel with the complainant and forcibly administered phenyl because of which the complainant was required to be hospitalized.

According to the applicant, the allegations made by the complainant against him are false. It is the

2 ABA311.17 case of the applicant that during the period of 6 years after marriage neither the complainant nor her parents have made any complaint about ill-treatment to the complainant.

The applicant, aged about 37 years, is working with the Central Railway and has stated that he is not involved in any other crime / offence. The investigating agency has not been able to point out that custodial interrogation of applicant is required to unearth the truth.

Considering the facts of the case, following order is passed:

In the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.168/2017 registered by the non-applicant, the applicant be released on bail on executing P.R. bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand) and furnishing one solvent surety in the like amount.

The application is allowed in the above terms.

JUDGE Tambaskar.