BAPU NARSING A. CHOUGULE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For an offence under Sections 354, 504, 506 (2) of Indian Penal Code on an online complaint filed by one temporary employee (sweeper) after due enquiry apart from release order in favour of the Petitioner dated 14.12.2012 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Bandra, on his bail application. Now, the statement is made by the learned counsel appearing for the State that the police have filed 'C' Summary Report and the same is pending for acceptance. Even otherwise after the departmental enquiry, the Committee has recommended and made observations against the Petitioner only to the following extent:

(2.) Respondents University of Mumbai by communication dated 29.10.2012 directed as under:

(3.) This is a peculiar case where though Petitioner's bail application was allowed on 14.12.2012 and the order was passed on the same date by the learned Magistrate, 9th Court, Bandra, Mumbai, the surety papers in connection with the same were processed on 15.12.2012, before the another learned Magistrate 12th Court, Bandra, as the learned Magistrate 9th Court Bandra was on leave. The police report was called for verification of surety papers on 15.12.2012. The police report was presented before another learned Magistrate 32nd Court Bandra as the learned Magistrate 9th Court, Bandra, was on leave on 17.12.2012 also. Ultimately, on 17.12.2012 the petitioner was released on bail, though there was a release order in his favour on 14.12.2012.