MAHENDRA NAYANMAL SURANA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD.

(2.) ON an FIR being lodged by one Shradha who happens to be wife of applicant No.4-Gaurav Mahendra Surana an offence has been registered with Mahila Thana Jodhpur police station vide CR No.200/09 for offence punishable under sections 498A, 406, 323 of IPC against the present applicants. The applicants are apprehending arrest at the hands of respondent No.2 through respondent No.1. The present applicant Nos.1 & 2 are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant whereas No.3 is sister-in-law and applicant No.4 is the husband. A limited prayer is made and the same is for grant anticipatory bail for a period of three weeks as the applicants are apprehending that senior inspector in charge, Mahila Thana, Jodhpur police station would cause arrest of the present applicants through Goregaon police station. In substance a transit bail for a period of three weeks is asked for. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on a division bench judgment in the case of N.K.Nayar & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., 1985 Cri.L.J. 1887 to contend that this Court is possessed of jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail as the arrest is being apprehended in Mumbai. Perused the papers. In my view this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail as prayed for. In the result I direct that in the event of arrest of the applicants-Mahendra Nayanmal Surana, Smt.Sumitra Mahendra Surana, Ms.Geetanjali Mahendra Surana, Gaurav Mahendra Surana in CR No.200/09 or any one of them he/she or they shall be released on bail on executing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or two sureties each in the like amount. This order shall remain in force for a period of three weeks. During the said period of three weeks the applicant shall abide by conditions stipulated in section 438(2) of Cri.P.C. Application stands disposed of. Authenticated copy of the order be issued.