TEGBAHADUR AMBRISHSINGH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application filed by the applicant who is an Advocate. The applicant is shown as an accused in C.R.No.250/2009 initially registered by the Goregaon police station but later on transferred to DCB CID, Unit-12, Mumbai. The complaint has been registered on the behest of one Usha Ramalu who was a panch witness in a murder case wherein one Neeraj Grover was murdered. In her statement, she has contended that she was approached by one Raju Wankhede and one other person and told that she should not give evidence in Neeraj Grover murder case. Raju Wankhede told her that in case she gave evidence then she would not be kept alive. Raju Wankhede informed her that she did not know him but if she wanted to ascertain, he could ring up one Advocate Murthy. Raju Wankhede then attempted to contact Advocate Murthy but since telephone connection could not be made, he rang up the present Advocate. Thereafter the conversation which took place between the said witness Usha Ramalu and the present applicant Advocate Thakur may be translated as follows : -

(2.) ON perusing the statement attributed to the present applicant, in my view, if proved, the applicant can be said to have committed an offence under Section 214 of IPC. The said section is as follows :-

(3.) IN the circumstances, it is directed that in the event of his arrest by the DCB CID in the said crime, the applicant will be released on bail in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount subject to the condition that he will not tamper with or contact the witnesses and will report to the investigating officer between 11.00 A.M and 3.00 P.M on 25th and 26th March 2010. Application stands disposed off.