Mumbai, May 10, 2024 – Meenakshi ORG Manisha Suresh Pawar has been granted bail by the Designated Court under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act, City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai, in an arson and criminal intimidation case. Judge Aditee Uday Kadam (Court Room No. 7) issued the order on May 9, 2024.
Pawar was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 24 of 2024, registered at the Kanjur Marg Police Station, for offenses under Sections 436 (mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house), 336 (act endangering life or personal safety of others),1 506 (criminal intimidation) read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code2 (IPC).
Background and Allegations:
The complainant alleged that she purchased a hut from applicant no.1 in 2014 for consideration of Rs.7,00,000/-. Since past one month, all the three accused were insisting to vacate the said hut. They are abusing and assaulting the informant party. On 06.02.2024, at about 3.00 a.m., informant realized smoke at the back side of her house. She immediately rushed towards it and saw that her house was set on fire. She raised an alarm and made appeal to the neighboring residents to help her. But then accused threatened them that if anyone would help her then he will set their houses on fire like the house of informant. Accused threatened the informant and went away.
Arguments Presented:
Advocate Rao Ranjeet Shripat, representing Pawar, argued that there was a prior property dispute between the parties and that the allegations were baseless. He stated that there were no eyewitnesses to the incident and that Pawar was arrested on February 6, 2024. He emphasized that there were no recoveries or discoveries from Pawar and that she is a woman.
Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Seema Deshpande, representing the State, opposed the bail, arguing that Pawar had a tendency to commit such offenses. They cited prior non-cognizable (NC) offenses against her for allotting huts and then forcibly evicting residents after receiving payment. Witness statements supported the complainant’s case, and the investigation was at a pre-mature stage.
Court’s Reasoning and Decision:
Judge Kadam noted that this was a successive bail application, with the first one having been rejected on merit due to Pawar’s prima facie involvement in the alleged offense.
However, the court observed that the charge sheet had been filed, indicating the completion of the investigation. The court also noted that Pawar’s role was secondary to the primary accused.
The court considered that Pawar is a local resident, willing to abide by conditions, and a woman who had been in custody for a substantial period.
Bail Conditions:
Pawar was granted bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one or more sureties of the same amount. The following conditions were imposed:
- Pawar is permitted to furnish provisional cash bail of Rs. 50,000 for three months.
- She is prohibited from entering the area/vicinity where the complainant resides until the end of the trial.
- She must comply with surety requirements before the concerned court.
- She must make herself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer when required, under written intimation.
- She must not tamper with the prosecution evidence or pressurize the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
- She must furnish her contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.
- She must attend the dates of trial regularly.
Order Details:
The order was dictated and signed on May 9, 2024. The certified copy was uploaded on May 10, 2024, at 3:57 p.m.
This decision reflects the court’s consideration of the filed charge sheet, Pawar’s limited role, her status as a woman, and the imposition of conditions to ensure her compliance with the legal process.