Rishikesh S/O Narayan Shambharkar v. State Of Maharashtra Through Police Station Officer, P. S. Salekasa, Gondia

aba.338.16 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application [ABA] No.338 of 2016 (Rishikesh Narayan Shambharkar vs.

State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Salekasa, District Gondia) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Shri R.M. Patwardhan, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri C.A. Lokhande, A.P.P. for the Non-Applicant/State.

CORAM

: S.B. SHUKRE, J.

DATE : 5 th OCTOBER, 2016.

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

This application has been opposed by the learned A.P.P. for the State contending that there has been no unequivocal consent in the present case. He relies upon a common decision rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Criminal Application Nos.218, 257 and 309 of 2015. Prima facie, there can be no doubt about the meaning of "unequivocal and voluntary agreement" assigned by the learned Single Judge in the said decision. But, going beyond that, I am of the view that the nature of the allegations made against this applicant is such that his custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary and on this count, this application, in my view, could be granted. Hence, the order. The application is allowed and the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant by this Court on 27th May, 2016 is hereby confirmed on the same conditions. The application is disposed of.

*sdw JUDGE

aba.338.16 2 C E R T I F I C A T E I certify that this order uploaded is a true and correct copy of the original signed order.

Uploaded by: S.D. Waghmare Uploaded on : 06/10/2016 P.A. to the Hon'ble Judge.