Anticipatory bail application rejected for accused falsely claiming government scheme funds via forged documents and bogus beneficiary lists, despite innocence plea.
Application for anticipatory bail rejected; no pre-arrest bail granted.
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.
4 ABA 936 OF 2014
vks
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.936 OF 2014
Hazrat Ibrahim Shaikh .. Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent.
Mr. Jaydeep Mane, for the Applicant. Smt. A. A. Mane, APP for the respondent State.
CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.
DATE : 27th August, 2014
P.C.
This application is moved for
anticipatory bail as the applicant is facing chargees under Sections 406, 409, 420, read
with 34 of the Indian penal Code registered
under C.R.No.187 of 2014 at Mohol police
Station, District: Solapur. One Sanjay
Namdeo Altekar gave report to the police
alleging that the Government of India has
launched a scheme for “Nirmal Bharat Ahiyan”
with a view to construct toilets for each hand
Page No.1 of 4
4 ABA 936 OF 2014
every house, and has sanctioned & approved an
amount of Rs.1,29,43,014/- to Mohol Taluka and
the said amount was deposited with Block
Development Officer of Mohol Taluka. Under the scheme every beneficiary who has constructed toilet in his house is entitled to Rs.4,600/and to increase the awareness the importance
of toilet. It is the case of prosecution that
the the applicant Hazrat is a school teacher
and was also promoter (Swachhata Doot) and therefore, he was to encourage people for constructing toilets. The applicant’s
appointment as promoter was upto August, 2013. However, he continued to work after August 2013. He did not remain present in the school
though he was a teacher. It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant accused Hazrat and the co-accused have made false submissions
and submitted bogus bills and also changed lists of beneficiaries.
Page No.2 of 4
4 ABA 936 OF 2014
has submitted that the applicant accused is innocent and he has not committed any offence. He has been attending the police station regularly since he was granted interim bail. He has not received any amount and therefore, the applicant be granted pre-arrest bail.
statements of witnesses. She submitted that he
has forged the document and also forged the
signature of Amarsingh Chandrahar. She submitted false claim of the beneficiary. She relied on the statement of witnesses who have
specifically mentioned that the applicant accused deposited amount twice in the name of persons and then withdrew amount of Rs.4600/-
each from those persons and thus, have committed offence of fraud and cheating. 4. Perused documents submitted by the learned APP. The applicant forged the signature of co-accused Amar @ Amarsingh Chandrahar. Statement of Dnyaneshwar Bachute
Page No.3 of 4
4 ABA 936 OF 2014 and other witnesses, which discloses that though applicant has prepared bogus documents and have earned money by submitting bogus list of beneficiaries, no pre-arrest bail can be granted to applicant. Application is rejected.
(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)
Page No.4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant facing charges under Sections 406, 409, 420, 34 IPC for alleged fraud in government scheme funds.
Hazrat Ibrahim Shaikh
The State of Maharashtra
Mridula Bhaktar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
