Santosh Kumar Iyer And ANR v. The State Of Maharashtra

40-aba-842-24 Gokhale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 842 OF 2024

(1) Santosh Kumar Iyer,

(2) Sudha Bhalchandra Pai.

..Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ..Respondents _____ Mr. Aabad Ponda, Sr. Advocate i/b. Manoj M. Kodekar a/w. Swati Khatri a/w. Deepika Mule a/w. Farzana Khan Applicants. Ms. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for State/Respondent. Mr. Umeshchandra Yadav Patil a/w. Anand Wagarkar for Intervenor.

_____ CORAM :- SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE :- 14 JUNE 2024 P.C. :- 1.

The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No.202 of 2024 registered at Andheri Police Station, Mumbai, on 08.04.2024, under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2.

Heard Mr. Aabad Ponda, learned senior counsel for the applicants, Ms. Ranjana Humane, learned APP for the State and Mr. Umeshchandra Yadav Patil, learned counsel for the Intervenor. Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date:

2024.06.18 12:36:13 +0530 VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE

40-aba-842-24 3.

By the previous order dated 17.04.2024 the applicant were protected by ad-interim order and they were directed to attend the concerned police station from 07.05.2024 to 09.05.2024. Learned APP, on instructions of the investigating officer, makes a statement that the applicants have attended the concerned police station and have co-operated with the investigation. She further makes a statement that the investigating agency does not want to arrest the present applicants in connection with the present subject matter. The statement is recorded and accepted.

4.

In view of this statement, learned senior counsel for the applicants does not press this application as there is no apprehension of arrest.

5.

The application is, therefore, disposed of as not pressed.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)