1
Cri.B.A.No.1312/22Ex.1
Order below Exh.1 in Cri. Bail Application No.1312/ 2022
1/
Tausif Amin Shaikh & 1
.. Applicants
Accused.
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
through PI Bhadrakali Police St.
Nashik. (Cr. No. 304/2022)
.. Respondent.
Order below Exh. 1
1.
This application has been filed by the applicants/accused
Tausif Amin Shaikh and Alishan Nadim Tamboli under section
438 of Cr.P.C. for releasing them on anticipatory bail in the event
of their arrest in the aforesaid Crime registered at Bhadrakali Police
Station, Nashik for the offence punishable under section 392, 354A,
452, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly interim
protection was granted to applicants.
2.
Heard Learned Advocate Shri Siddique, for the applicants
and learned A.P.P. Smt. Sangale for the State. IO is also present.
Perused the case papers.
The informant is appeared through
Advocate. Perused the say filed by informant.
3.
It is the case of the prosecution that the
applicants
committed criminal trespass, looted the informant and also outraged
the modesty of the informant during the course of action.
4.
On perusal of record, it reveal that the applicants and
informant party were acquainted with each other.
financial transaction.
They have some
On that count, they had dispute.
Learned
Advocate for the applicants produced some documents on record to
show that the applicant No.1 has lodged report against the informant
party on 12.10.2022.
Thus, there is case and counter case. Learned
2
Cri.B.A.No.1312/22Ex.1
Advocate for the informant submitted that the applicant party
pressurize the informant and continued to harass them. Copies of two
NC filed by the informant party are produced on record.
5.
In respect of the offence of outraging modesty law is
settled as follows “In regard to the allegations of assault or criminal
force with intent to outrage her modesty and intimidation as envisaged
under Secs. 354A, 504 and 506 read with Sec. 34 of IPC, custodial
interrogation of the applicant is not necessary for the sake of
investigation.”
6.
It appears from the say filed by the investigating officer
that the applicants cooperated the investigation.
There is no any
substantial reason quoted in the say filed by the IO to resist the
application.
Learned Advocate for the applicants submitted that
applicants have no criminal antecedents and they are local residents.
Applicants are ready to abide any conditions on grant of interim relief.
Therefore, considering all these aspects, this Court is of the view that
interim relief granted to applicants can be confirmed.Hence, the order.
:: O R D E R ::
1]
The application (Exh.1) is allowed.
2]
Interim protection granted to applicants stands
confirmed subject to same terms and conditions.
ADITEE
UDAY
KADAM
Nashik.
Date : 31.10.2022.
Digitally
signed by
ADITEE
UDAY
KADAM
Date:
2022.11.01
11:45:53 0600
(Aditee U. Kadam)
Additional Sessions Judge2,
Nashik.