Rajashri Nanaso Bhosale v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

LSP 1 26 wp 6131.24.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No. 6131 of 2024 Mrs. Rajashri Nanaso Bhosale ...

Petitioner V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and anr.

...

Respondents.

Mr. Rajaram Bansode a/w.

Sheetal Ubale and Advocaet Mohan Chavan Advocates for the Petitioner.

Ms. S.E. Phad APP for the State.

PSI-Anil Jaypatre Satara City Police Station present.

CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date:

2025.07.10 11:46:41 +0530 DATE : 7th July 2025.

LATA SUNIL PANJWANI P.C. :

Heard Mr. Bansode, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner.

2.

Initially, her request for return of property was allowed by the Court of JMFC, Satara on 2nd May 2024. At that time, the offences were under Sections 420,406, 409 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. The husband of the Petitioner is one of the accused. 3.

However, the Police have not returned the vehicle. In the meantime, the provisions of MPID Act were invoked. That is how the Petitioner approached the Special Court, however, his application was rejected on 7th October 2024.

LSP 2 26 wp 6131.24.doc 4.

It is for the reason the Petitioner has not disclosed the source of her independent income.

5.

According to Mr. Bansode the vehicle is purchased from own funds and supporting documents are annexed.

6.

It is true that if the MPID Act is invoked, there is provision for appointment of Competent Authority and he is supposed to make orders. The learned APP could not take instructions from the investigating officer who is present whether any correspondence is made.

7.

Stand over to 15th July 2025.

(S.M. MODAK, J.)