Bombay High CourtABA/479/2017allowed

Rumeel S/O. Dharamveer Sharma v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Police Station Dhantoli Nagpur City Nagpur

2017-07-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 aba479.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 479 OF 2017 (RUMEEL S/O DHARAMVEER SHARMA...VS...STATE OF MAH. THR. P.S.O. PS DHANTOLI, NAGPUR CITY, 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 A. C. Jaltare, Advocate for Applicant.

Shri V. A. Thakre, A.P.P. for Non-applicant.

CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : 13 th JULY , 2017.

Heard.

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.126 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail.

According to the Investigating Agency, co-accused Akshay Agrawal (Director of Firm known as "Hanlon") and the applicants have cheated the complainant by alluring him to part with Rs.1,57,000/- assuring him to secure a job for him.

The application is opposed on the ground that the matter is under investigation and custodial interrogation of the applicant is required to find out whether other innocent persons are also duped by the accused. The learned A. P. P. has pointed out that earlier also crime for offences punishable under Sections 376, 388, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and

2 aba479.17 Section 67 of Information Technology Act is registered against the applicant.

This Court has passed order on 6th July, 2017 granting interim protection to the applicant on condition of attending the police station on 8th, 10th and 12th July, 2017. The learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has complied with the order and has co-operated with the Investigating Agency and this fact is not controverted by the non-applicant.

Considering the facts of the case and nature of accusations against the applicant, the order passed on 6th July, 2017 granting protection to the applicant is confirmed. The application is allowed accordingly.

JUDGE PBP