Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15971 (BOM)

LATA MADHUKAR CHEKE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

ABA/2039/2025 · 2026-10-07

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 922 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2039 OF 2025 LATA MADHUKAR CHEKE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ... Mr. P. P. More, Advocate for Applicant Ms. P. J. Bharad, APP for the Respondent/State CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED : 7th OCTOBER, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. The Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 535/2022, registered with Taluka Jalna Police Station, District Jalna, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. This is the second bail application filed by the Applicant. The first application came to be rejected as withdrawn on 10.11.2022. Thereafter, on 06.05.2023, the charge-sheet came to be filed. In view of the change in circumstances, the present second application is entertained. 3. Learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that, though the name of the Applicant finds mention in the First Information Report, apart from the said vague reference, there is absolutely no material in the charge-sheet 922 ABA 2039.2025.odt 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AUG:47059 connecting the Applicant with the crime in question. He, therefore, submits that the liberty of the Applicant deserves to be protected. 4. Learned APP opposes the grant of any protection to the Applicant by referring to the charge-sheet, which, according to her, indicates that other persons have also been cheated in a similar manner. 5. Perusal of the First Information Report shows that the name of the Applicant is mentioned therein only as the wife of one of the co-accused. The charge-sheet does not indicate any material or evidence to show that the Applicant was a party to any transaction or was a beneficiary of the alleged crime. There is an allegation against the accused of having sold the vehicle belonging to the Informant without his consent. Even in this regard, there is no material to suggest that it was the Applicant who sold the said vehicle. 6. Considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed, custodial interrogation of the Applicant does not appear to be necessary. Hence, the following order: ORDER (i) Application is allowed. (ii) In the event of arrest of Applicant in connection with Crime No. 535/2022, registered with Taluka Jalna Police Station, District Jalna, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, she shall be released on bail on furnishing 922 ABA 2039.2025.odt 2 of 3 PR Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount. (iii) She shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly. (iv) She shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever. (v) She is further directed to cooperate the investigating agency for further investigation. 7. Learned APP for the Respondent/State to communicate this order to the concerned Police Station. ( R. M. JOSHI, J.) ssp 922 ABA 2039.2025.odt 3 of 3