Allowed

Pradeep Shrinivas @ Raju Gupte v. Central Bureau of Investigation, Acb

Bombay HC15 Apr 2013APPA/145/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant accused of cheating and forgery, requiring a fine deposit and reporting conditions, noting his family's dependence on him during a decade-long trial.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail in Rs. 20,000 with sureties; applicant directed to deposit remaining fine and comply with reporting, travel, and passport conditions.

Pradeep Shrinivas @ Raju Gupte Vs Central Bureau of… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

APPA-145-13.sxw

¶2

Dixit

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.145 OF 2013 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.114 OF 2013

¶6

Pradeep Shrinivas alias Raju Gupte ... Applicant V/s. Central Bureau of Investigation, A.C.B. Mumbai & Anr. ... Respondents

¶7

Mr. Kuldeep Patil, i/by Mr. Ganesh M. Mohite, for the Applicant.

¶8

Mr. H.S. Venegavkar for Respondent No.1.

¶9

Mr. D.P. Adsule, A.P.P., for Respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

¶11

DATE : 15TH APRIL, 2013.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

The Criminal Appeal No.114 of 2013 is admitted.

¶14

This Criminal Application is for bail.

¶15

It is stated that the fine amount is Rs.2,25,000/-. A sum of Rs.50,000/has been deposited in this case and the balance sum will be deposited positively by 31^st May, 2013, but for that purpose, the Applicant be released from custody.

¶16

The offences alleged are of cheating and forgery. The sentence imposed is of Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years and fine amount under diverse sentences.

¶17

1/2

¶18

APPA-145-13.sxw

¶19

Ordinarily, this Criminal Application ought to have been placed before the same learned Judge, but finding that there are some changed circumstances and the Applicant has arranged for deposit of a substantial portion of the fine amount and that he has been in custody during the trial, which went on for ten years, he deserves an opportunity of working and to support his family. The Applicant is the only bread earner in the family. By imposing appropriate conditions, he can be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following order :-

¶20

“O R D E R”

¶21

(i) The Applicant, who is Accused in Special Case No.26 of 1997, is enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs.20,000/with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶22

(ii) The Applicant shall deposit remaining fine amount, namely, Rs.1,75,000/- in the Trial Court on or before 31^st May, 2013.

¶23

(iii) The Applicant shall deposit his Passport, if any, with the Trial Court. The Applicant shall not leave Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court.

¶24

(iv) The Applicant shall report to the Office of the Central Bureau of Investigation, A.C.B, Mumbai once in fifteen days

¶25

(v) It is made clear that any violation or breach of the conditions, which are imposed, shall entail in cancellation of bail.

¶26

The Criminal Application is disposed of in the above terms.

¶27

List the Criminal Appeal No.114 of 2013 for peremptory hearing in the week commencing from 17^th June, 2013.

¶28

2/2

Pradeep Shrinivas @ Raju Gupte v. Central Bureau of Investigation, Acb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Shrinivas @ Raju Gupte v. Central Bureau of Investigation, Acb

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

Bharat Dattaram Amre Vs the State of Maharashtra

Avinash Vilas Shendge Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jagdish @ Surya Kaliram Joshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sudeep Kumar Ganesh Khanna Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rahul Shivaji Rai Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rahul Shivaji Rai Vs the State of Maharashtra