This court dismissed an application filed for anticipatory bail in an alleged cheating and forgery case under Sections 420, 465, 468, and 471 of the IPC. The judge held that the applicant did not deserve release.
Application for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(1) Cri. Appln. 3892-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3892 OF 2012
Rambhau S/o Vaijnath Bidgar
Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and anr. Respondents
Mr. N.D. Kendre, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. P.N. Mule, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J. DATED : 18TH SEPTEMBER, 2012
ORAL ORDER:
1. Heard both sides.
2.Apprehending arrest at the hands of Parali
Vaijnath Police Station Dist. Beed in crime no. 60 of 2012
for the offence punishable under section 420, 465, 468,
471 of the Indian Penal Code, the present Application for
anticipatory bail is filed.
3.The allegations would show that the present
applicant had secured employment with the Maharashtra
State Electricity Distribution Company, on the basis of
forged educational certificate from the Industrial
Training Institute. After making enquiry, the employer
has terminated him alongwith other similarly situated
persons.
(2) Cri. Appln. 3892-2012
4.The applicant states that he is terminated from
the services, he is a young man, that no investigation is
to be made. In the circumstances, the relief is sought.
5.On the other hand, learned A.P.P. submits that
the very fact that after making full enquiry in the
episode, the employer has ultimately terminated, would
show a strong prima facie case that the applicant
alongwith other 20 candidates was successful in getting
employment with the public sector undertaking, on the
basis of the forged documents.
6.Considering the rival submissions, in my view,
the applicant does not deserve to be released on
anticipatory bail. The Application is therefore
dismissed.
Sd/-
arp/
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rambhau
The State of Maharashtra
M.T. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court