Allowed

Ajay Prabhakar Deshmukh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Aug 2014ABA/973/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Jungles of the High Court at Bombay granted anticipatory bail to the applicant accused of forgery in misappropriation of funds under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 409, 477(A) r/w. 34. Bail was granted subject to conditions including furnishing a bond, depositing misappropriated amounts, and attending police stations.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to furnishing a bond of Rs. 15,000 with sureties, depositing misappropriated amounts totaling Rs. 2,79,451 with the Magistrate Court, and attending the police station

Ajay Prabhakar Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra — Money Laundering | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

27.ABA973_2014.doc

¶2

Vidya Amin

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 973 OF 2014

¶6

Ajay Prabhakar Deshmukh … Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶7

Mr. Prashant Mohan Patil, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa, APP for the State.

¶8

CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 4^th August, 2014.

¶9

P.C.

¶10

This Application is moved by the applicant/accused for anticipatory bail, as the applicant/accused is facing charges under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 409, 477(A) r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The offence is registered at the instance of Vinita Vijay Kesarkar, who was working as Assistant General Manager in Maharashtra State OBC Finance and Development Corporation, at C.R. No. 184 of 2013 with Shahuvadi Police Station, District Kolhapur.

¶11

It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant/accused is a recovery officer. During the period from 2010 to 2012, he did not submit a receipt book of 50 receipts but only deposited the money towards 5 receipts. Thus, he misappropriated the money and forged remaining 45 receipts. The management could recover money of 13 receipts, however,

¶12

1 of 4

¶13

27.ABA973_2014.doc

¶14

they did not get any account of remaining 32 receipts. Thus, it is the case that the applicant/accused has thereby misappropriated an amount of Rs.1,76,152/, out of that, he deposited some amount and the remaining amount is yet to be deposited. He also mentioned that the management is trying to collect the exact figure of misappropriation, as it all depends on the receipts which are not deposited by the applicant/accused.

¶15

The learned counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that the applicant/accused is innocent. He has not committed any offence. He has deposited the amount. He is also ready to cooperate the police. In support of his submissions, he filed affidavit of applicant/accused stating that all the receipts are seized by the police.

¶16

Learned APP while opposing the application submitted that alongwith the receipts, the applicant/accused has also taken away the scanner from the office. He submitted that as on today, they found that the applicant/accused has committed misappropriation of Rs.1,96,025/ and he has deposited amount of Rs.1,11,005/. Thus, till today Rs.85,020/ is yet to be deposited with Corporation for Disabled. He has misappropriated an amount of Rs.3,70,583/ of OBC Corporation, out of which, he has deposited Rs.1,76,152/ and thus, Rs.1,94,431/ is yet to be

¶17

2 of 4

¶18

27.ABA973_2014.doc

¶19

recovered. He further submitted that still the process of finding out the amount of misappropriation is going on.

¶20

The learned counsel for the applicant/accused, upon instructions of the applicant/accused who is present in the Court, has submitted that the applicant/accused is ready to deposit an amount of Rs.85,020/and Rs.1,94,431/ with the Magistrate Court within two weeks i.e. on or before 20^th August, 2014 without prejudice.

¶21

On perusal of the FIR, it is found that prima facie the applicant/accused has committed an offence. However, he is suspended from the service and he showed his readiness to deposit the amount. Hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant/accused on the following terms and conditions:

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

(i) In the event of arrest, the applicant/accused be enlarged

¶24

on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in a sum of Rs.15,000/ with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶25

(ii) The applicant/accused shall deposit Rs. Rs.85,020/and

¶26

Rs.1,94,431/ with the Magistrate Court as per the statement made in the Court.

¶27

3 of 4

¶28

27.ABA973_2014.doc

¶29

(iii) The applicant/accused shall attend the concerned police station on every Saturday between 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. for one month and thereafter as and when called by the Investigating Officer till the filing of the charge sheet and shall cooperate the investigating officer.

¶30

(iv) The trial Court may entertain the Applications in respect of the said amount, if made by the prosecution and decide on merits either during the pendency of trial or after the trial.

¶31

The Application stands disposed of on above terms.

¶32

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶33

4 of 4

Ajay Prabhakar Deshmukh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Prabhakar Deshmukh 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

Prakash Shivaji Jadhav and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nilesh Uttamrao Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sujata Shambaji Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Subhash Ramchandra Khot Vs the State of Maharashtra

Hanumant @ Dada Nivrutti Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shailendra Dashratha Kawanekar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra