Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Eknath Ganpatrao Khadse (aged 72), Mandakini Eknath Khadse (aged 62), and Girish Dayaram Chaudhary (aged 50), filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 1002 of 2023 registered at Bund Garden Police Station, Pune, for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The FIR alleged that the petitioners, along with others, forged a will of one deceased person and misappropriated property, and that the first petitioner, a former Minister, abused his official position. The investigation was at an advanced stage; the main accused was already in judicial custody, and documents had been seized. The petitioners argued that they were willing to cooperate and that custodial interrogation was not required. The State opposed bail, citing the gravity of the offences. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that since the investigation was nearly complete and documents were already seized, custodial interrogation was not necessary. The court granted anticipatory bail to all three petitioners on certain conditions, including that they shall not tamper with evidence, shall appear before the investigating officer as required, and shall not leave the country without court permission. The court also directed that the petitioners shall furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 each with one surety. The petition was allowed, and rule was made absolute.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Custodial Interrogation - Petitioners sought pre-arrest bail in a case involving forgery of a will and misappropriation of property - Court held that when documents are already seized and petitioners are willing to cooperate, custodial interrogation is not necessary - Held that anticipatory bail can be granted subject to conditions (Paras 1-20). B) Prevention of Corruption Act - Offences by Public Servant - Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) - Allegations of corruption against a former Minister - Court noted that the investigation is at an advanced stage and no custodial interrogation is required - Held that the petitioners are entitled to bail (Paras 1-20). C) Indian Penal Code - Forgery and Cheating - Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B - Alleged forgery of a will and cheating - Court observed that the main accused is already in custody and the petitioners have cooperated with the investigation - Held that anticipatory bail should be granted (Paras 1-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in connection with offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, given that the investigation is at an advanced stage and documents are already seized.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition and granted anticipatory bail to all three petitioners on conditions: (i) they shall not tamper with evidence; (ii) they shall appear before the investigating officer as required; (iii) they shall not leave India without court permission; (iv) they shall furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 each with one surety.
Law Points
- Anticipatory bail
- custodial interrogation
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 420 IPC
- Section 467 IPC
- Section 468 IPC
- Section 471 IPC
- Section 120B IPC
- Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988
- Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d)
- Section 7
- Section 8
- Section 9
- Section 10
- Section 11
- Section 12
