Jayshree Kanabar vs State of Maharashtra

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 11

C. T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KAROL
Jayshree Kanabar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Ms. Rukhmini Bobde, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Ms. Soumya Priyadarshinee, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Aren, Adv. Mr. Amlaan Kumar, Adv. Mr. Jatin Dhamija, Adv. Mr. Naveen Kumar Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Nitin Saluja, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. A. Selvin Raja, AOR

JUDGMENT :

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The widow of the victim in MCOCA No.274/2021 arising out of Crime No.413/2020 registered at Bundgarden Police Station, Pune against respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein, who are respectively accused Nos.2 and 3 therein, filed this Special Leave Petition against the order dated 06.11.2023 in Criminal Bail Application No.2164/2022 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The said crime was registered for offences punishable under Sections 320, 120B, 201 and 212 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’), Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, 1959; Section 37(1)(3) read with Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (for short, ‘the MCOCA’). As per the impugned order, accused Nos.2 and 3 were granted bail in the said case. Manifold contentions have been raised to challenge the grant. Before delving into them, compendiously, we will refer to the prosecution’s case which led to the case on hand.

3. There was a long-drawn civil dispute between the deceased Rajesh Haridas Kanabar on one side and families of respondent Nos.2 and 3 on the other over

Click Here to Read the rest of this document