Dismissed

Popat Vamanro Kapse v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC22 Nov 2012REVN/278/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision application seeking discharge, the High Court of Bombay held that a prima facie case of cheating exists based on statements indicating the applicant received money with a promise of employment, leading to the conduit's suicide. The court rejected the argument that a prior absolution in departmental enquiry affects criminal liability, holding no case for discharge.

What did the court decide?

Application for discharge rejected. No case for discharge found on prima facie evidence presented.

Popat Vamanro Kapse Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

vrd 1 REVN278/12

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.278 OF 2012

¶5

Popat Vamanrao Kapse v/s

¶6

The State of Maharashtra

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

Mr A.P. Mundargi, Sr. Counsel i/b Mr Avinash Kamkhedkar for Applicant.

¶10

Mr A.S. Shitole, APP for State.

¶11

CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL J.

¶12

DATED : 22ND NOVEMBER 2012.

¶13

P.C. :-

¶14

Five job seekers were allured for dreams of employment using conduit of Omprakash Hiremath,

¶15

alleged P.A. of M.L.A.

¶16

The accused No.3 / applicant is in Forest

¶17

Department as a Forest Officer. The job seekers

¶18

desired employment in the said Department. The accused applicant from the papers was also involved

¶19

in screening the candidates at preliminary stage.

¶20

Totally Rs.8,75,000/- are collected from five

¶21

vrd 2 REVN278/12

¶22

persons by said Omprakash Hiremath and handed over to the Officers of the Forest Department. The unemployed youth did not get appointment orders, they were in distress position. Omprakash Hiremath, conduit in the network faced humiliation, depression and mental agony. As jobs were not given inspite of graft and due to persistent pressure from the villagers and the persons who paid the amount, he committed suicide leaving behind suicide note.

¶23

The role of accused applicant in league is

¶24

demonstrated in the statements of Vijaykumar Hiremath, Suresh Tele, Nagesh Bhandarkavathe, Santosh Barure and Ambadas Bagale. I find Nagesh

¶25

and Vijaykumar speak in tune with each other, while other three persons are in tune with each other, but the fact remains, the accused applicant, a responsible Officer in the Department was instrumental at the time of receiving money through the conduit with a promise to ensure employment to those who paid the money. Committing suicide by Omprakash Hiremath was the aftermath of depression,

¶26

vrd 3 REVN278/12

¶27

being deceived in promise.

¶28

The learned senior counsel submits that in

¶29

the departmental enquiry on the same accusations, the applicant has been absolved.

¶30

It may be correct, however, the parameters

¶31

in the department enquiry and in a criminal trial proceed in different pedestal and would not influence at the time of passing orders seeking discharge.

¶32

Factual aspects, primarily illustrate role

¶33

and involvement of the accused applicnant in the

¶34

deceased Omprakash Hiremath committing suicide or the affairs of cheating him. No case for discharge.

¶35

The observations are not on concluded trial, they

¶36

are prima facie in nature. Application is rejected.

Popat Vamanro Kapse v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Popat Vamanro Kapse v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shubhangi Sanskrutik Krida Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Dilip Krishnarao Mohite

Varsha Laxmanrao Deshpande and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bharati Mohanrao Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Kavita Goel and Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater and Anr.

Popat Vamanro Kapse Vs the State of Maharashtra