VIJAYANTA MANIK PAWAR v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Court: Bombay High Court
Bench: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE BHARATI DANGRE
Judgment date:
Case summary
Bombay High Court judgment dated 2020-12-16. VIJAYANTA MANIK PAWAR v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
1/3 9 ABA 262-20 AND ABA 97-20. doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1312 OF 2020 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 97 of 2020 Vaijayanta Manik Pawar .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1303 OF 2020 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 262 of 2020 Himanshu Lohani .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents … Mr. Satyavrat Joshi with Nitesh Mohite for the applicant in both the matter. Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, APP for the State. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J th DATED : 16 DECEMBER, 2020 P. C:- 1 Once again the applicants seek extension of time for th complying with the order dated 24 February 2020. It is by this order both the applicants were held entitled for their release on bail in anticipation of their arrest in C. R. No. 364 of 2019 Tilak 2/3 9 ABA 262-20 AND ABA 97-20. doc registered with Paud Police Station.
The affidavits filed by the applicants were taken on record and a statement that they will deposit an amount of Rs. 35 lakhs (Rs. 17. 50 lakhs each) came to be accepted as an undertaking to the Court. It was also observed that this amount would not be constituted as total liability towards the prosecution case. 2 Unable to abide by the said undertaking, an nd application was moved and on 2 June 2020, when total amount of Rs. 21 lakhs was deposited and for deposit of Rs. 14 lakhs (Rs. 7 st lakhs each by the applicant), time was extended till 31 October 2020. 3 By the present two Interim Applications, extension of time is sought by six months. 4 Mr. Joshi, the learned counsel representing the applicants state that as on date, an amount of Rs. 10 lakhs remain unpaid by both the applicants, out of which applicant Himanshu has to clear amount of Rs. Four lakhs, he having been deposited Rs. 13,50,000/-, whereas Vaijayanta has to deposit Rs. 6 lakhs, since she has deposited Rs. 11,50,000/-.
The extension is sought on account of the financial constraint faced by the applicants in the wake of global pandemic and according to them, it was not possible to arrange for the said amount at one-go and though they Tilak 3/3 9 ABA 262-20 AND ABA 97-20. doc have an undertaken to deposit the amount in instalments, it was not possible for them to adhere to the time stipulations. If some time is granted, the applicants would arrange for the deposit amount. 5 Considering the said application, the reason cited appear to be genuine. The applicants have already proved their bonafides by depositing an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs jointly and what remains unpaid is an amount of Rs. 10 lakhs. To comply th with the undertaking, time is therefore, extended till 28 February 2021. During this period, the applicant Vaijayanta would arrange for an amount of Rs. 6 lakhs and applicant Himanshu would arrange for Rs. 4 lakhs.
The payment should be th ensured on or before 28 February 2021 in the Court of JMFC, Pune which would then follow the course in terms of the original th order dated 24 February 2020. Interim Applications stand disposed of. 6 It is made clear that this would be taken as a last indulgence and the time will not be extended further. (BHARATI DANGRE, J) Tilak
Source: Bombay High Court. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.