SLP (Crl.) No(s). 2725/2024
ITEM NO.18 COURT NO.17 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). 2725/2024
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 08-02-2024 in CRLA(ABA) No. 73/2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Nagpur)
GITA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondent(s)
(IA No.48080/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.48081/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. )

Date : 28-02-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA BHALACHANDRA VARALE
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anmol Kheta, Adv.
Ms. Tanya Srivastava, Adv.
Ms. Ranu Purohit, AOR
Mr. Sameer Sonwane, Adv.
Mr. Asif Quereshi, Adv.
Anshala Verma, Adv.
Pradyuman, Adv.
Mr. Yashas R.K., Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, AOR
Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv.
Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv.
Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv.
Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Anmol K., Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Issue notice.
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State.
Heard Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, learned counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra, who is on caveat here and takes notice for the State.
The petitioner is a lady RTO officer presently under investigation in a crime relating to Section 307 IPC. We have been informed that the other accused Shri Saket Gaikwad has already been granted bail by Sessions Court.

We say nothing about the merits of the case or the investigation, but presently we are inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant as the co-accused Saket Gaikwad has already been granted anticipatory bail.

There is an apprehension which has been raised on behalf of Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, learned counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra that the petitioner has been absconding and has not been co-operating in the investigation. We therefore, make it clear that in case the petitioner does not co-operate with the investigation, the State would be at liberty to move an application for recall of this order.

Consequently, in the event of the arrest of the petitioner the petitioner shall be released forthwith on bail, subject to such terms and conditions the concerned Court may impose.
The special leave petition is disposed of.
All pending applications are disposed of.

(NEETA SAPRA) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)