Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Santosh s/o Chabiladas Chaudahri, filed an application for regular bail under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He was named as accused in Crime No. 224 of 2011 registered at Zilla Peth Police Station, District Jalgaon, for offences punishable under Sections 384, 385, 323, 504, 506, 109, 114 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The informant, Chandrashekhar s/o Prakash Attarde, a builder and developer, alleged that the applicant and his associates demanded money from him in connection with a land deal and assaulted him. The applicant contended that the demand was for repayment of a genuine loan of Rs. 5,00,000 given to the informant, and that the informant had issued a cheque which was dishonoured. The court noted that the applicant had no criminal antecedents and had been in custody since 20th December 2011. The court observed that the allegations did not prima facie constitute extortion as the demand appeared to be for a genuine debt. The court allowed the application and granted bail to the applicant on executing a personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with one surety, and imposed conditions including not tampering with evidence and not leaving India without court permission.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Bail - Regular Bail - Sections 384, 385, 323, 504, 506, 109, 114, 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Applicant accused of extortion and assault - Allegations that applicant demanded money from informant for a land deal - Court found that the demand was for repayment of a genuine loan, not extortion - Applicant had no criminal antecedents and was in custody for 2 months - Held that applicant is entitled to bail on conditions (Paras 1-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail when the allegations of extortion are based on a demand for repayment of a genuine loan, and the applicant has no criminal antecedents.
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with one surety. The applicant shall not tamper with prosecution evidence, shall attend the trial regularly, and shall not leave India without prior permission of the court.
Law Points
- Bail
- Prima Facie Case
- Extortion
- Genuine Dues
- Section 384 IPC
- Section 385 IPC
- Section 323 IPC
- Section 504 IPC
- Section 506 IPC
- Section 109 IPC
- Section 114 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (02) 22
Criminal Application No. 611 of 2012
Shri A.P. Mundargi, Senior Advocate instructed by Shri Joydeep Chatterji, Advocate for the applicant; Shri S.G. Nandedkar, APP for the respondent/State; Shri P.P. Chavan, Advocate for the complainant to assist A.P.P.
Santosh s/o Chabiladas Chaudahri
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Application for regular bail in a criminal case involving allegations of extortion, assault, and criminal intimidation.
Remedy Sought
The applicant sought regular bail from the High Court.
Filing Reason
The applicant was arrested and remanded to custody in connection with Crime No. 224 of 2011 for offences under Sections 384, 385, 323, 504, 506, 109, 114 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Previous Decisions
The applicant had been in custody since 20th December 2011; no previous bail order was mentioned.
Issues
Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail when the allegations of extortion are based on a demand for repayment of a genuine loan.
Whether the applicant has any criminal antecedents that would disentitle him to bail.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant's counsel argued that the demand was for repayment of a genuine loan of Rs. 5,00,000 given to the informant, and that the informant had issued a cheque which was dishonoured. The applicant had no criminal antecedents and was in custody for 2 months.
The State opposed the bail application, submitting that the allegations were serious and the applicant was involved in extortion and assault.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the demand for repayment of a genuine loan does not constitute extortion under Section 384 IPC. Since the applicant had no criminal antecedents and was in custody for two months, he was entitled to bail on conditions.
Judgment Excerpts
The demand appears to be for repayment of a genuine loan, not extortion.
The applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 20th December 2011.
Procedural History
The applicant was arrested in Crime No. 224 of 2011 and was in custody since 20th December 2011. He filed Criminal Application No. 611 of 2012 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, seeking regular bail. The application was heard on 21st February 2012 and allowed.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 384, 385, 323, 504, 506, 109, 114, 34
