Sunil Harful Singh v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No.2096 of 2024 Sunil Harful Singh Aged about 43 years, Occupation Business, R/at-Daizy Meadow, BK No.1060, Room No.04, 2nd Floor, Royal Park, Near CHM College, Ulhasnagar - 421 003, District Thane, Maharashtra.
...Applicant v/s.
The State of Maharashtra [Through Senior Police Inspector], Central Police Station.
...Respondent
---- Mr RD Suryawanshi, a/w. Roshan Hule and Mr Sumeet Gemnani, i/b. SR Pille, for the Applicant.
Mr Amit A Palkar, APP, for Respondent State.
Ms Minal Chandnani, a/w. Savvy Kolhekar, for the Intervenor. API Rakesh Shewale, Central Police Station, Ulhasnagar, is present. ---- Digitally signed by MAMTA AMAR KALE Date:
2024.07.31 19:00:58 +0530 MAMTA AMAR KALE Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 30 July 2024 P.C.:
Heard Mr RD Suryawanshi, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, Mr Amit Palkar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State, and Ms Minal Chandnani, the learned Counsel appearing for the intervenor/ informant.
2.
By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.890 of 2024, registered at Central Police Station, Ulhasnagar, Thane, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 384, 385, 504, and 506(2) read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. 3.
Mr RD Suryawanshi, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant and Ms Minal Chandnani, the learned Counsel representing the intervenor/ first informant, in unison, submit that following the Sessions Court's rejection of anticipatory bail application, the applicant and the informant resolved their dispute amicably. The informant has no grievance against the applicant and has consented to quash the FIR by filing a criminal writ petition. The learned Counsel draw the attention of this Court to the consent affidavit of the informant, which supports the request for anticipatory bail. 4.
Upon perusal of the records, the genesis of the offence appears to be civil in nature. The parties have now arrived at a settlement regarding their dispute, and the informant consents to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. The informant, who has been identified by his Counsel, expresses no objection and consents for granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant reiterating the contents of his consent affidavit. Additionally, there is a significant delay in filing the FIR.
5.
Given the above, it may be expedient to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(i) In the event the applicant is arrested in connection with CR No.890 of 2024, registered at Central Police Station, Ulhasnagar, Thane, he shall be released on bail on executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and not indulge in activities that would tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses. 6.
The application stands disposed of accordingly. (R.N. Laddha, J.)