Bombay High Court
Manish Tripathi vs The State Of Maharashtra on 24 August, 2021
Bench: S. K. Shinde
17-ABA-1968-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANT. BAIL APPLICATION NO.1968 OF 2021
Manish Tripathi ... Applicant
Vs
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents
...
Mr. Ghanshyam Upadhyay with Mr. Rajkumar Mishra
with Jyoti Bhandari with Vishal Shukla i/by Law Juris for
the Applicant.
Mr. H.J.Dedhia, APP for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.
DATE : 24th AUGUST, 2021.
P.C. :
Heard Mr. Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the
applicant and Mr. Dedhia, the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2 Applicant is arraigned as accused in twelve
crimes at Mumbai and Thane for organising vaccination
camps illegally and unauthorisedly. The frst crime was
Shivgan 1/4
17-ABA-1968-2021.odt
registered on 29th June, 2021 at Kandivali. He was arrested
in the said crime. Whereafter his custody was transferred
from one crime to another. Thus, he has been arrested in
seven crimes leaving fve.
3 Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in fve crimes
registered under Section 188, 268, 270, 274, 275, 276, 308,
419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 470, 471 read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
4 At the outset, it may be stated that applicant fled
application for anticipatory bail directly in this Court.
Although the application is maintainable ordinarily,
application is not entertained unless exceptional reasons
are made out.
5 Mr. Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the
applicant would submit that the First Information Reports in
Crime Nos.474 of 2021, 185 of 2021, 533 of 2021, 534 of
Shivgan 2/4
17-ABA-1968-2021.odt
2021, 638 of 2021 and 204 of 2021 were not valid being a
second First Information Reports and consequently, the
investigation made pursuant thereto is of no consequence.
In support of his contention, he would rely on the judgment
of the Apex Court in the case of T.T.Anthony v. State of
Kerla and Amitbhai Shah v. State of Gujarat.
6 Mr. Upadhyay in the course of his arguments
would submit that the learned Judge of this Court (Coram:
Shri Chitre, J.) had entertained the application in the
identical facts and granted relief. When asked for copy of
the judgment passed by Justice Chitre, Mr. Upadhyay
submitted that he has not brought copy of the said
judgment to the Court.
7 Nevertheless, whether subsequent First
Information Reports were valid or invalid and whether,
investigation made pursuant thereto is justifable
Shivgan 3/4
17-ABA-1968-2021.odt
investigation or not, it, cannot be gone into the proceedings
under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Further, since the order passed by Justice Chitre on which
applicant is relying on is not before this Court, I grant him
time to produce the said judgment for further consideration.
Be it noted, that though this application was fled on 10 th
August, 2021, circulation has been sought nearly after
fourteen days. Even otherwise applicant is in custody since
29th June, 2021. For these reasons, I do not see any urgency
in the matter.
8 Let the application be listed for consideration on
2nd September, 2021.
(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)
Shivgan 4/4
