Allowed

Nareshchandra Subhash Joshi v. the State Ofmah and Anr.

Bombay HC9 Sept 2010APPLN/2862/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail to an applicant facing charges of misappropriation of funds at Zilla Parishad Nandurbar. The Court found arrest unnecessary pending investigation due to an indefinite handwriting expert opinion regarding a disputed receipt.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; ad-interim bail order confirmed until filing of chargesheet.

Nareshchandra Subhash Joshi Vs the State Ofmah and Anr. — Corruption | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

(1) CRI.APP. 2862.2010

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2862 OF 2010

¶4

Nareshchandra S/o Subhash Joshi,
Age 38 years, Occu.: Service,
R/o Patelwadi, Tq. Nandurbar,
District Nandurbar .. Applicant

¶5

 VERSUS

¶6

1. The State of Maharashtra

¶7

2. The District Superintendent of Police, Nandurbar, District Nandurbar

¶8

 (Copy for respondents to be
 served on Public Prosecutor,
 High Court Bench at Aurangabad) .. Respondents

¶9

Mr. K.C. Sant, Advocate for the Applicant
Mrs. B.R. Khekale, APP for the respondent-State

¶10

...

¶11

CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.
DATED : 9TH SEPTEMBER, 2010

¶12

ORAL ORDER:-

¶13

1.By this Application, the applicant seeks

¶14

directions under section 438 of the Code of Criminal

¶15

Procedure. He has been granted ad-interim
anticipatory bail vide order dated 28.7.2010.

¶16

CRI.APP. 2862.2010

¶17

2.The applicant is a cashier and was attached
to Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar, in the Health
Department. A report is lodged against him for
alleged misappropriation of certain amounts,
particularly that of Rs. 3,39,471/- which was the
amount encashed by demand draft. He contended that
he paid the amount to Shri B.L. Patil towards the
Provident Fund amount due. He produced a receipt
signed by said Shri B.L. Patil, the ex-staff member.
A report of handwriting expert was called in respect
of the signature found on the receipt because it was
suspected to be a dubious and fabricated receipt.
The report submitted by the Assistant State Examiner
of Documents, C.I.D., M.S., Pune, prima facie
indicates that no definite opinion could be expressed
by him.

¶18

3.The applicant might have committed certain
irregularity while disbursing the amount or rather
following due procedure for such purpose. However,
since day one he has come out with a case that he
paid the said amount to Shri B.L. Patil, the retired

¶19

(3) CRI.APP. 2862.2010

¶20

Medical Officer, towards the due P.F. amount.

¶21

Considering the explanation of the applicant and the
indefinite opinion of the handwriting expert, it will
have to be stated that arrest of the applicant may
not be required for effective investigation. He is
likely to be humiliated in the event of arrest.

¶22

4.Forthereasonsafore-stated,the

¶23

Application is allowed. Ad-interim bail order dated
28.7.2010 is conformed. The anticipatory bail will
come to an end on filing of the chargesheet.

¶24

 Sd/-
 [V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.]

¶25

arp

Nareshchandra Subhash Joshi v. the State Ofmah and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nareshchandra Subhash Joshi v. the State Ofmah and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vimalbai Laxman Taru Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shankar Dadarao Nagargoje and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shirish Abhaykumar Chakote Vs Digamber Haribhau Landge

Babasaheb Bhagwanrao Reddy Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Munja Balaji Komatwar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharshtra

Sardar Fatesing Pawara and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Anr.