Allowed

Mohan Dattaram Desai and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC26 Nov 2015ABA/1298/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants facing charges of cheating and forgery. The court noted considerable delay in lodging the complaint and found no prima facie justification for custodial interrogation, ruling that applicants could not abscond and justice would not be thwarted.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 each with solvent sureties, reporting to IO for interrogation, and not leaving Sindhudurg district until charge-sheet filing without pe

Mohan Dattaram Desai and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2015)

rsk

ABA-1298-15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICAITION NO.1298 OF 2015

¶6

Mohan Dattaram Desai & Anr. v/s.

¶7

..Applicants

¶8

The State of Maharashtra.

¶9

..Respondent

¶10

Mr. C. K. Pendse i/b Mr. Bakul Bhosale for the applicants. Mr. Sarang Kotwal alongwith Shailesh Chavan for intervenor/complainant. Mrs. Veera Shinde, APP for the State.

¶11

CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 26, 2015.

¶12

P.C.

¶13

. This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the

¶14

aforesaid applicants apprehending their arrest in C. R. No.77/2015 registered at Sawantwadi City Police Station, District Sindhudurg, for the offences punishable under Section 409, 468, 465, 471 r/w 34 of the IPC .

¶15

Heard Mr. Pendse, learned Counsel for the applicants, and the learned APP for the State.

¶16

I have perused the records and considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. The records prima facie reveal that the

¶17

rsk 2 ABA-1298-15

¶18

complainant who is a Joint Secretary of the Trust had lodged a complaint stating that applicants had appointed Lab Attendants in the year 2013 without authority and by forging the letterhead of the institution. The complainant had stated that the applicants had cheated the institution as well as government by making such appointments.

¶19

The records prima facie reveal that the posts applied by candidates were advertised on 6/7/2013. The candidates were interviewed and subsequently appointed in the month of July'2013. The posts were approved by the Joint Director and the said Lab Attendants were paid salary from August'2013. Prima facie, in my view there is considerable delay in lodging the complaint, which in itself would not justify custodial interrogation. The applicants are the residents of Sawantwadi and there is no possibility of the applicants absconding or thwarting the course of justice. Therefore, in my considered view, the applicants are entitled for bail.

¶20

Hence, the anticipatory bail application is granted on the following terms.

¶21

i) In the event of the arrest of the applicants in Crime No.77/2015 registered with Sawantwadi City Police Station, District Sindhudurg ,

¶22

rsk 3 ABA-1298-15

¶23

the applicants be released on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty-five Thousand Only) each with one or two solvent sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned JMFC, Sindhudurg.

¶24

ii) The applicants shall report to the Investigating Officer, initially for a period of 5 days from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., and thereafter as and when required by the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation.

¶25

iii) The applicants shall not leave the Sindhudurg district till filing of the charge-sheet without prior permission of the JMFC, Sindhudurg.

¶26

(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Mohan Dattaram Desai and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Dattaram Desai and Anr. 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

Mohd. Hashim Mohd, Sami Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ajit Bapu Satam Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shantaram Laxman Pansare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashok Maruti Orase Vs the State of Maharashtra

Surekha Shankar Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Malay Umeshchandra Srivastava Vs the State of Maharashtra