Sushila Darshan Jagtap v. The State Of Maharashtra

195.25ABA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 46 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO.195 OF 2025 SUSHILA DARSHAN JAGTAP

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr.Ganesh K. Gole h/f. Mr.A.D.Sonkawade APP for Respondent-State : Mr.S.P.Sonpawale Advocate for Assist to P.P. : Mr.N.B.Patekar ...

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

DATE : 03.03.2025 P.C. :

1] The applicant has filed affidavit dated 03.01.2025 and the same is taken on record.

2] The applicant along with her son, namely, Rahul Darshan Jagtap with one person, who would assist in explaining the account, shall attend the concerned police station on 11.03.2025.

3] The learned APP to take instructions as regards payment made by the applicant to the complainant, so also, services rendered by the applicant to the complainant, and also, as regards payment in respect of commission paid to the complainant by the applicant. However, it is clarified

195.25ABA that the prosecution cannot insist upon the disclosure of trade secret, which are not connected with the issue in investigation.

4] The applicant to give explanation in writing. 5] List this matter on 17.03.2025. Interim protection, if any, to continue till the next date. [ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE DDC