Anticipatory bail application rejected as prima facie case existed for custodial interrogation based on FIR alleging criminal breach of trust and cheating regarding loan disbursal.
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.
21 BA 978 OF 2012
vks
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.978 OF 2014.
Rajashri Kailas Zodage .. Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent.
Mr. Rahul S. Kate, for the Applicant. Smt. A. A. Mane, APP for the respondent State.
CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.
DATE : 5th August, 2014
P.C.
Application is moved for anticipatory
bail as one Keshar Prabhakar Ghodkus, has given the information pursuant to which F.I.R. is registered under C.R.No.172 of 2014 at Karmala Police Station, District: Solapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian penal Code. It is the case of the prosecution that the ladies belonging to Mahar caste formed a group of Bachat Gat. The applicant was working as Secretary of the said group. They applied for the loan to bank and they got loan of Rs.30,000/- each. It is
Page No.1 of 3
21 BA 978 OF 2012
the allegation that the applicant accused while disbursing the loan amount, handed over Rs.20,000/- each and kept Rs.10,000/- with her and told the ladies that this amount would be given subsequently. Thereafter the ladies given Rs.500/- towards instalment which was collected by the applicant accused since April, 2012. However, in February, 2014, they received information from the bank that no repayment is made towards their loan. Hence they questioned the applicant accused. At that time she gave in writing on stamp paper that she used the entire amount for herself. However, she would be depositing the amount till 14th December. So they waited. However, it appears that till today she has not
deposited the amount. Hence complaint was given.
submits that the applicant is innocent and
therefore she be granted pre-arrest bail.
Page No.2 of 3
21 BA 978 OF 2012 3. The learned APP opposed the application. 4. On perusal of the F.I.R. I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant as prima facie case is made out for custodial interrogation of the applicant. Hence the application is rejected.
(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)
Page No.3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 438 CrPC.
Whether a prima facie case has been made out to justify custodial interrogation of the applicant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajashri Kailas Zodage
The State of Maharashtra
Mridula Bhatar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
