Shridhar Sutar 1 30-ABA-1343.17.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1343 OF 2017
Vishwanath Vitthal Ittenavru ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
.....
Mr. Vikrant V. Phatate for the Applicant.
Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for the State.
.....
CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J.
DATE : 16th AUGUST, 2017 P. C. :
1. The present Application is filed for relief of anticipatory bail in C.R. No. 433 of 2017, registered with Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur, for offences punishable under sections 384 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Both the sides are heard.
3. The papers of investigation were made available for perusal.
4. The crime is registered on the basis of report given by Block Development Officer (Agriculture). He has made allegations that the 1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2018 16:01:21 ::: Shridhar Sutar 2 30-ABA-1343.17.doc present applicant who is Ex-Sarpanch of village Halholi, Tal. Akkalkot, Dist. Solapur, was blackmailing him by saying that there were irregularities in sanctioning new borewells and houses under the Government schemes and the complainant was responsible for those irregularities. He was threatening to take the matter to various committees and also to Legislative Assembly of the State. The applicant had given calls to the complainant on phone to make the demand. The last demand was made on 22/06/2017 at about 11.50 a.m. The report came to be given on 06/07/2017. It is the contention of the complainant that his mother was sick and he was required to remain with his mother for her treatment and, therefore, the delay is caused.
5. The papers of investigation contain transcript of mobile conversation which took place on 22/06/2017 between the complainant and the present applicant. The transcript is consistent with the aforesaid allegations.
6. The present applicant appears to be the leader of opposition of the political party in Zilla Parishad, Solapur. It appears that he had made correspondence through MLAs. But, that was done on 28/06/2016 and 28/07/2016. It can be said that due to some 2 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2018 16:01:21 ::: Shridhar Sutar 3 30-ABA-1343.17.doc irregularities committed in the implementation of the aforesaid schemes, action was also taken against the complainant. It is the contention of the applicant that only due to the steps taken by him against the complainant, false allegations are made against him.
7. There may be substance in the complaints made by the applicant that there were irregularities in implementation of Government schemes and the present complainant is responsible for those irregularities. That does not mean that allegations of blackmailing made against the present applicant need not be believed as there is records of aforesaid nature. The applicant was blackmailing Government officers by giving threats and he is in politics and is misusing the position. In view of these circumstances, this Court holds that the applicant's custodial interrogation is a must. During custodial interrogation, more information may come out and that may be against the Government officers who were blackmailed by the present applicant.
8. In the result, the application stands rejected. Ad-interim relief granted earlier is vacated.
(T. V. NALAWADE, J.) 3 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2018 16:01:21 :::