Allowed

Ramkishan Tukaram Kagdewad v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Bombay HC12 Feb 2013APPLN/26/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court extended interim protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to eight applicants accused in a fraud case involving misappropriation of funds under the Employment Guarantee Scheme. The court imposed conditions including weekly attendance and fixed residence while allowing surrender on bail by March 2013.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. extended till 31st March 2013 with conditions of weekly attendance at IO and fixed residence. Applicants directed to be released on Rs. 50,000 bond plus su

Ramkishan Tukaram Kagdewad Vs the State of Mah and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

1 Cri.Appln.5753/2012

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5753 OF 2012

¶4

Vishwanath S/o Bhaurao Kadam Age : 45 years, Occ : Service, R/o Khandgaon, Tq. Naigaon (Kh), Dist. Nanded.

¶5

..Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra Through Ramtirth Police Station, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶8

The District Superintendent of Police Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶9

..Respondents

¶10

Mr P.V.Mandlik, Senior Counsel i/b Mr A.S.Gandhi, Advocate for applicant

¶11

Mr G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents

¶12

WITH

¶13

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5757 OF 2012

¶14

Seema Ashokrao Mugaonkar Age : 22 years, Occ : Service, R/o Naigaon (BZ), Tq. Naigaon, Dist. Nanded.

¶15

..Applicant

¶16

Versus

¶17

The State of Maharashtra Through Ramtirth Police Station, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶18

The District Superintendent of Police Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶19

..Respondents

¶20

2 Cri.Appln.5753/2012

¶21

Mr P.V.Mandlik, Senior Counsel i/b Mr A.S.Gandhi, Advocate for applicant

¶22

Mr G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents

¶23

WITH

¶24

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5747 OF 2012

¶25

Kishan S/o Ramji Gavali

¶26

Age : 50 years, Occ : Ex. Block Development Officer, Retired as Deputy Engineer, R/o Swami Vivekanand Nagar, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶27

..Applicant

¶28

Versus

¶29

The State of Maharashtra Through Ramtirth Police Station, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶30

The District Superintendent of Police Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶31

..Respondents

¶32

Mr P.V.Mandlik, Senior Counsel i/b Mr A.S.Gandhi, Advocate for applicant

¶33

Mr G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents

¶34

WITH

¶35

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5759 OF 2012

¶36

Balaji Madhavrao Shivankar Age : 59 years, Occ : Service, R/o Loha, Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded.

¶37

..Applicant

¶38

Versus

¶39

The State of Maharashtra Through Ramtirth Police Station, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶40

The District Superintendent of Police Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶41

3 Cri.Appln.5753/2012

¶42

..Respondents

¶43

Mr A.Y.Patil Indrale, Advocate for applicant Mr G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents

¶44

WITH

¶45

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5609 OF 2012

¶46

Vithal Sambhajirao Gaikwad Age : 55 years, Occ : Service, R/o Ravinagar, Jangamwadi, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶47

..Applicant

¶48

Versus

¶49

The State of Maharashtra Through Ramtirth Police Station, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶50

The District Superintendent of Police Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶51

Mr P.V.Mandlik, Senior Counsel i/b Mr A.S.Gandhi, Advocate for applicant Mr G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents

¶52

..Respondents

¶53

WITH

¶54

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5750 OF 2012

¶55

Savita Sahebrao Yerewad Age : 28 years, Occ : Household, Sarpanch, R/o Kandala, Tq. Naigaon, Dist. Nanded.

¶56

..Applicant

¶57

Versus

¶58

The State of Maharashtra Through Ramtirth Police Station, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶59

The District Superintendent of Police Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. ..Respondents

¶60

4 Cri.Appln.5753/2012

¶61

Mr P.V.Mandlik, Senior Counsel i/b Mr A.S.Gandhi, Advocate for applicant

¶62

Mr G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents

¶63

WITH

¶64

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5752 OF 2012

¶65

Udhav S/o Tulshiram Santre Age : 35 years, Occ : Labour, R/o Kandala, Tq. Naigaon, Dist. Nanded.

¶66

..Applicant

¶67

Versus

¶68

The State of Maharashtra Through Ramtirth Police Station, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶69

The District Superintendent of Police Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.

¶70

..Respondents

¶71

Mr P.V.Mandlik, Senior Counsel i/b Mr A.S.Gandhi, Advocate for applicant

¶72

Mr G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents

¶73

WITH

¶74

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 26 OF 2013

¶75

Ramkishan S/o Tukaram Kagdewad Age : 59 years, Occ : Service Sub Post Master, R/o Tq. Naygaon, Dist. Nanded.

¶76

..Applicant

¶77

Versus

¶78

The State of Maharashtra For Ramteerth Police Station, Dist. Nanded

¶79

The District Superintendent of Police Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. ..Respondents

¶80

5 Cri.Appln.5753/2012

¶81

Mr P.V.Mandlik, Senior Counsel i/b Mr A.S.Gandhi, Advocate for applicant

¶82

Mr G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondents

¶83

CORAM : P.D. KODE, J.

¶84

DATE : 12th February 2013

¶85

PER COURT :

¶86

Heard both the parties.

¶87

By these eight applications, eight applicants/accused apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.105/2012, registered with Ramtirth Police Station, District Nanded for offence under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with sec.34 of Indian Penal Code, have prayed for a direction under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. The said applicants are accused No.1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 13 to 15 as shown in the first information report. They are respectively Gramsevika, Sarpanch, Rojgar Sevak, Assistant Accountant, Panchayat Samiti, Block Development Officer, Assistant Programme Officer, Sub Post Master and Assistant Sub-Post Master at village Naigaon, District Nanded. The said offence has been registered by the said police station in pursuance of the directions given under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. upon a private complaint lodged by a social worker alleging of fraud committed in respect of Employment Guarantee Scheme floated by the Central Government and particularly while distributing an amount of Rs.6 Crores sanctioned for the wages of labours serving for development of the said village in consonance

¶88

6 Cri.Appln.5753/2012

¶89

with the scheme prepared by Panchayat Samiti and implemented through the Grampanchayat. It is alleged that the labour charges were to be paid from an amount which was handed over to the Post Office, Naigaon.

¶90

The sanctioned amount is said to have been misappropriated within a span of four years.

¶91

By an order dated 8.1.2013 passed in these applications by my predecessor, all the applicants have been protected by interim order. Though the prosecution was expected to file the say, the learned A.P.P. has expressed inability for the same by pointing out that the investigation in relation with the crime, which has taken place within a span of four years, presently stands at initial stage. It is urged that further time may be required for registering the said crime. Thus, considering the gamut of the offence, the matters required to be investigated, presently the prosecution cannot be blamed for the inability to give the concrete information regarding the material collected or likely to be collected against the applicants. The learned A.P.P. has also not refuted the submission of learned Counsel for the applicants of themselves having not misused or breached any condition imposed while granting interim protection.

¶92

Thus, considering the nature of the crime of which the evidence would be predominantly available in the shape of

¶93

7 Cri.Appln.5753/2012

¶94

documentary evidence, either in the record of Panchayat Samiti or in the Post Office, presently it is difficult to perceive the necessity of custodial interrogation of any of the applicants. As a matter of fact, the refusal of request at this stage may deprive the investigating agency such an opportunity necessary at a proper stage depending upon the progress of the investigation made. Having regard to the same, the time being protection granted to the applicants deserves to be extended, upon imposing further certain terms with liberty to apply for extension of said protection, in the event the same is found necessary. The learned A.P.P. has also submitted that for fair investigation, certain conditions may be imposed upon the applicants for securing their presence and so also for preventing misuse of the protection granted for fleeing away and/or for committing any other offence or for any other oblique purpose.

¶95

The interim order granted vide order dated 8^th January 2013 is hereby confirmed up till 31^st March 2013 with the following modification:

¶96

In the event of arrest of the aforesaid applicants in connection with the said crime, they are directed to be released on bail up till 31^st March 2013 upon concerned applicant furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty thousand)

¶97

8 Cri.Appln.5753/2012

¶98

with one or more sureties to make the like amount and subject to condition that the applicants -

¶99

(i) shall attend the Investigating Officer on every Sunday in between 10.00 am to 1.00 pm and so also whenever required by the Investigating Officer in connection with investigation;

¶100

(ii) shall stay at the address mentioned in the application and shall not change the same without the intimation to the Investigating Officer;

¶101

(iii) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation levelled against them so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police Officer;

¶102

(iv) shall not misuse the order for committing further offence and/or fleeing away.

¶103

The applications stand disposed of accordingly with liberty to the applicants to pray for extension before the expiry of the period of protection granted.

¶104

( P.D. KODE, J.)

¶105

vvr/5753.12criappln

Ramkishan Tukaram Kagdewad v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramkishan Tukaram Kagdewad v. the State of Mah 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

Sunil Shankar Kale Vs the State of Mah

Sunita Laxmaan Raut Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Sk Babar Sk Noor Vs the State of Mah

Asha Shivajirao Bhise Vs Sadhu Gopa Chavan(Lamani) Died Thr Lrs Kamlabai and Ors.

Suresh Tryambak Patil Vs the State of Mah

Vijay Ramdas Kharade Vs the State of Mah