Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Digambar Manohar Satam, filed a second anticipatory bail application before the Bombay High Court after his first application was rejected by the same court (Coram: Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J.) on 6th August 2013. The case involved an offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, related to cheque dishonour. The applicant sought anticipatory bail apprehending arrest. The court noted that the same judge who rejected the first application was available but the matter was placed before a different bench. The court observed that the applicant had already joined the investigation and no custodial interrogation was required. The State opposed the application, but the court found that the change in circumstances, namely the applicant's cooperation and the nature of the offence, warranted grant of bail. The court allowed the application and granted anticipatory bail to the applicant on certain conditions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Second Application - Change in Circumstances - The applicant filed a second anticipatory bail application after the first was rejected. The court considered the fact that the applicant had already joined the investigation and no custodial interrogation was required. Held that the second application was maintainable due to change in circumstances and granted bail. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in a second application after rejection of the first, considering the change in circumstances and the nature of the offence.
Final Decision
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application and granted bail to the applicant on certain conditions.
Law Points
- Anticipatory bail
- second application
- change in circumstances
- custodial interrogation
- cooperation with investigation
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (08) 56
Anticipatory Bail Application No.933 of 2013
Mr. A.R. Pande i/b Mr. Anand A. Pande for Applicant, Mr. V.B. Konde Deshmukh APP for State-Respondent, Mr. Rizwan Merchant in person (Orig. Complainant)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Anticipatory bail application in a criminal case involving cheque dishonour under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Remedy Sought
The applicant sought anticipatory bail to avoid arrest in connection with the offence.
Filing Reason
The applicant apprehended arrest in a case registered under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Previous Decisions
The first anticipatory bail application was rejected by this Court (Coram: Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J.) on 6th August 2013.
Issues
Whether the second anticipatory bail application is maintainable after rejection of the first application.
Whether there is a change in circumstances warranting grant of anticipatory bail.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant argued that he had already joined the investigation and no custodial interrogation was required.
The State opposed the application, but the court found that the change in circumstances justified grant of bail.
Ratio Decidendi
A second anticipatory bail application is maintainable if there is a change in circumstances. The applicant's cooperation with investigation and the nature of the offence (non-custodial) constitute such change.
Judgment Excerpts
This case was circulated for urgent orders as regards grant of Anticipatory bail.
It is noticed that this is a second Application for Anticipatory Bail.
It is not in dispute that the same Honourable Judge is available at Mumbai with some other assignments.
Procedural History
The applicant filed a first anticipatory bail application which was rejected on 6th August 2013. Thereafter, the applicant filed a second anticipatory bail application which was heard and allowed on 29th August 2013.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): Section 438
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881:
