1 BA-1385-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1385 OF 2011 Smt. Asha Vitthal Gaikwad ... Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.Mahindra Deshmukh,Advocate, for the applicant. Smt. R.V.Newton, APP for the respondent - State. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 9th November, 2011. P.C. 1. The applicant, who is an accused in Crime No.113/2010 registered at Manchar Police Station Police Station under Sectisoons 379, 392, 395 read with Section 34 of IPC, seeks to be released on bail. 2. As per the FIR lodged on 24.8.2010, the first informant Nirmala was waiting for a bus at S.T. Stop of Kalamb Bechalis. At that time, a silver coloured car, in which 3 men and one woman were sitting came there. The first informant asked the accused-appellant, who was in the car, for a lift, which she agreed to give. After that, Nirmala boarded the car. She was wearing certain gold ornaments. The accused, who had given the lift advised said Nirmala not to wear 2 BA-1385-11.sxw so many gold ornaments while in journey. Due to this, said Nirmala removed her ornaments and put them in a handkerchief and then kept that bundle in a rexin bag in her hand. At about 3.30 p.m., the car reached at Village Supe and she alighted from the car. From there she contacted her relatives on telephone. After some time, when she looked into the bag, she found that the handkerchief containing her ornaments was missing. About that incident, she lodged the report against the unknown persons. In view of the FIR,the offence under Sec. 379 read with Sec. 34 of IPC was registered against four unknown persons, including the woman. Later on, the accused persons were arrested. On the basis of information given by one of the accused, i.e. Ashok Sangale, not only the property of this case, but stolen property of some other cases, was also recovered. Police Inspector of Manchar Police Station recorded supplementary statement of first informant on 25.8.2010 wherein it was alleged that one of the inmates of the car was armed with a knife. She was threatened with the knife and she was not allowed to shout and the ornaments were forcibly taken away. Confessional statement of Ashok Sangale, which led to discovery was also prepared on the same line as if ornaments were forcibly snatched from the woman. In view of the supplementary statement of the Police Inspector added Sections 364, 392, 395 and 397 of IPC. Investigation was filed and charge sheet was also filed. 3 BA-1385-11.sxw 3. On perusal of the FIR, it appears to be simple case of theft under Sec. 379 read with Sec. 34 of IPC and whole of the property has been recovered on the basis of information given by another accused Ashok. Prima facie, there is reason to believe that Police Inspector, Manchar Police Station had falsely created and recorded the statement of the first informant about use of knife, threats and gagging of mouth and snatching of ornaments just to show that it was a serious offence of robbery or dacoity. If such robbery or dacoity would have taken place, the FIR would have clearly indicated. The FIR clearly shows that the lady was not aware how and in what circumstances the handkerchief containing her ornaments was stolen away from her bag. The applicant is a lady who was in the car. Nothing was recovered from her. 4. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant be released on her executing P.R. of Rs.15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount with condition that she shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)