ITEM NO.7               COURT NO.12               SECTION II-A

               S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)  No(s).  1814/2024 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated  22-01-2024 in CRLA(ABA) No. 620/2023 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay At Nagpur)

ABHISHEK & ANR.                                    Petitioner(s)

                                VERSUS

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                               Respondent(s)

( IA No.30653/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED  JUDGMENT and IA No.30654/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. )

 Date : 12-02-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

         HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

         HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

For Petitioner(s)   Ms. Menaka Guruswami, Sr. Adv.

                   Mr. Rajat Joseph, AOR                 

                   Mr. Ganesh Kidambi, Adv.

                   Mr. Nilesh Fulzele, Adv.

                   Mr. Hrishikesh Chitaley, Adv.

                   Mr. Vijay Kari Singh, Adv.

For Respondent(s)  Mr. Abhikalp Pratap Singh, AOR

                   Mr. Kartik Shukul, Adv.

                   Mr. Kartikey, Adv.

                   Ms. Yamini Singh, Adv.                

          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

                             O R D E R

We   have   heard   learned   senior   counsel   for   the petitioner(s) and learned counsel for the complainant/caveator. Having   regard   to   the   nature   of   dispute   between   the parties   and   on   perusal   of   the   impugned   order,   w e   are   not   inclined to   interfere   in   the   matter.   Hence,   the   Special   Leave   Petition  is dismissed.

However,   liberty   is   reserved   to   the   petitioner(s)   herein   to seek regular bail.

It   is   needless   to   observe   that   if   the   petitioner(s)   file   an application   seeking   regular   bail,   the   same   shall   be   considered expeditiously and on its own merits without being influenced by the observations   made   by   the   High   Court   for   rejecting   anticipatory bail.

Learned   senior   counsel   for   the   petitioner(s)   has   also submitted that the petitioners appeared as many as 16 times before the   Investigating   Authority   and   would   continue   to   do   so   but   the investigation has been tardy.

It   is   therefore,   directed   that   the   investigation   shall   be conducted expeditiously and a decision one way or the other on the conclusion of the investigation shall be taken by the Investigating Authority.

Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.

(NEETU SACHDEVA)                                (NIDHI WASON)

ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                         COURT MASTER (NSH)