Dismissed

Aniruddha Vishnu Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC21 Jul 2014ABA/722/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application, the court examined allegations of forgery regarding land documents and subsequent property auction. Considering the specifics of the charges and the prima facie case established by the investigating agency, the judge refused bail.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail rejected; no protection granted to the applicant.

Aniruddha Vishnu Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

7 ABA 722-G

¶2

vks

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.722 OF 2014. WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.431 OF 2014 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.722 OF 2014.

¶4

Aniruddha Vishnu Jadhav .. Applicant. V/s.

¶5

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent.

¶6

AND

¶7

Mr. Devidas B. Vani, .. intervener.

¶8

Mr. Niranjan P. Shimpi, for the Applicant. Smt. A. A. Mane, APP for the respondent State. Mr. P. G. Sarda, for the applicant in Application no.431 of 2014

¶9

CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

¶10

DATE : 21^st July, 2014

¶11

P.C.

¶12

Application is moved by applicant for

¶13

anticipatory bail as the applicant accused is facing charges under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, read with Section 34 of the Indian

¶14

Page No.1 of 6

¶15

7 ABA 722-G

¶16

Penal Code, registered under C.R.No.27 of 2014

¶17

District:Solapur. One Devidas Vani, is the first informant. He has given report that his father has obtained loan of Rs.30,000- from

¶18

one Shraddha Nagari Co-op Credit Society by mortgaging his land admeasuring 30.15 sq meters, (out of 60.30 square meters), City

¶19

survey No.1067/1 on 21.2.2005. His father

¶20

expired on 13^th June, 2009. His father could not repay the entire loan. After his father's death, the names of his legal representatives

¶21

were entered in the record of all the landed property including agricultural land bearing No.1277. However, on 24.10.2013 he found that the names of legal representatives of complainant from the 7xl2 extract of land Gat No.1277 were deleted by the applicant accused and his brother co-accused Maharuddha Jadhav.

¶22

So also a forged 7xl2 extract in respect of land Gat No.1277 under the forged signature of

¶23

Page No.2 of 6

¶24

7 ABA 722-G

¶25

Talathi and by affixing forged seals, was prepared. On the basis of that forged 7xl2

¶26

extract the documents were submitted before

¶27

the District Deputy Registrar of the Cooperative Societies and the said property was subsequently auctioned by misleading the authority. It is the case of the complainant that the said property was auctioned illegally as the property was mortgaged by his father. The said property was sold for Rs.20,04,000/to one Navnath Uttam Dare on 09.10.2013 and therefore, he lodged complaint.

¶28

The learned counsel for the applicant accused has submitted that the complainant himself and his sisters have sold the land gat No.1277 on 13.12.2013 and thus, he was not the owner of the said property for which complaint

¶29

is lodged. He further relied on the documents. He also relied on the Property Attachment Notice dated 10.2.2011, and the recovery certificate issued under Section 101

¶30

Page No.3 of 6

¶31

7 ABA 722-G

¶32

of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act,

¶33

wherein Gat No.1277 was shown to be attached. It is mentioned that the complainant remained

¶34

absent at the time of hearing of the matter and the property bearing gat No.1277 was

¶35

already attached by the Co-operative society.

¶36

The learned counsel further submitted that the applicant is innocent and therefore, he be

¶37

given protection.

¶38

counsel for the intervener, both have

¶39

opposed the application. The learned APP

¶40

produced papers of investigation. She

¶41

submitted that the applicant accused is facing

¶42

charges of forgery i.e. preparation of bogus

¶43

7xl2 extract in the name of third person. Statement of Talathi is recorded. He has denied his signature, seal and so also

¶44

preparation of 7xl2 extract. She further

¶45

submitted that the statement of a person whose name is mentioned during the auction as bidder

¶46

Page No.4 of 6

¶47

7 ABA 722-G

¶48

in the auction proceeding is recorded. He has

¶49

stated that he was not the person present at the time of action and bid. He has also denied his signature. She further relied on the order dated 23.6.2014, passed by District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Solpaur, in a petition filed by complainant and his sisters, challenging auction of gat

¶50

No.1277. She pointed out the District Deputy Registrar has cancelled the said auction and has also concluded that the said action was in breach of rules and regulations.

¶51

Perused the documents submitted by

¶52

both parties. The allegations made against the

¶53

applicant accused by the complainant are

¶54

specific. In view of the submissions made by the learned APP, prima facie case against

¶55

applicant for his custodial interrogation is

¶56

made out. It is not fit case to grant

¶57

protection to applicant. Hence application is rejected.

¶58

Page No.5 of 6

¶59

7 ABA 722-G

¶60

The leaned counsel for the applicant

¶61

submits that he wants to challenge this order before the Supreme Court and therefore, seeks time. This order is stated for a period of two weeks.

¶62

Bail Application as also application

¶63

for intervention, are disposed of accordingly.

¶64

(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶65

Page No.6 of 6

Aniruddha Vishnu Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aniruddha Vishnu Jadhav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Eknath Dattu Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Halimabi Hussain Parande Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Prakash Jalindar More and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bipin Kumar Shashibhushan Choudhari @ Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dhanaji Sadashiv Pawar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kishor Bhagwan Matsagar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra