Allowed

Y. Jitendra v. CBI (Bs and Fc)

Bombay HC16 Jun 2015APPA/625/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed criminal appeals filed by three convicted individuals challenging their conviction and sentence. The court granted bail pending the appeals, noting an arguable case regarding the applicability of Section 409 IPC and the clearance of outstanding bank amounts.

What did the court decide?

Relief to all applicants by ordering their release on the same bail as granted by the trial court with fresh bonds. Applications for suspension of sentence were disposed of accordingly.

Y. Jitendra Vs CBI (Bs and Fc) — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

26)APPA625-628,645.15

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

APPELLATE SIDE

¶5

CRIMIMNAL APPLICATION NO. 625 OF 2015 WITH CRIMIMNAL APPLICATION NO. 626 OF 2015 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 592 OF 2015

¶6

Mr. Y. Jitendra

¶7

.. Applicant/Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

CBI (BS & FC) & Anr. .. Respondents

¶10

WITH CRIMIMNAL APPLICATION NO. 627 OF 2015 WITH CRIMIMNAL APPLICATION NO. 628 OF 2015 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 593 OF 2015

¶11

Mr. Ramesh Ranmal Jain .. Applicant/Appellant

¶12

Versus

¶13

CBI, ACB & Anr. .. Respondents

¶14

WITH

¶15

CRIMIMNAL APPLICATION NO. 645 OF 2015 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 608 OF 2015

¶16

K. Jayaprakash Shetty

¶17

.. Applicant/Appellant

Versus

1/4

26)APPA625-628,645.15

¶22

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

¶23

.. Respondents

¶24

Mr. P. Janardhan a/w E.B. Dixit, Rishi Bhuta i/b Yadav P.R., Advocate for the applicant in APPA 625/15 & 626/15 Mr. Prakash Naik, Sr. Advocate i/b Vijay Hiremath, Advocate for the applicant in APPA 627/15 & 628/15

¶25

Mr. Rajiv Patil, Sr. Advocate i/b Jaydeep Lele, Advocate for the applicant in APPA 645/15

¶26

Mr. A. R. Patil, APP for the State in all the matters Mr. J. R. Solanki, PP for the respondent-CBI., in all matters.

¶27

CORAM:-A. R. JOSHI, J. DATED : -16/06/2015

¶28

P.C.

¶29

All the three appeals are separately filed by the respective accused. They are challenging the same impugned judgment and order passed by the Special Court, CBI under Bank Security and Frauds Cell. The applicants were convicted for the offences punishable u/s 409 r/w r/w 34, 120-B and also u/s 411 of IPC. Maximum punishment awarded is of five years. One of the appellant-applicant is ex-bank officer, who is presently retired and other two appellants-applicants in other two appeals are the account holders. The allegations as to giving the financial benefits by clearing cheques without there being any credit balance in the accounts, happened in the year 1996. However, subsequently the

¶30

2/4

¶31

¶32

26)APPA625-628,645.15

¶33

outstanding amounts as per the debit balance were cleared. However, during the bank inspections these transactions surfaced and enquiry was held and ultimately complaint was lodged with C.B.I., and offences were registered in the year 1998.

¶34

2 During the trial, all the appellants-applicants were on bail and the conviction is for five years. Though it is submitted on behalf of the CBI that the appeals can be expedited and the appellants-applicants may not be released on bail during the pendency of appeals, it appears that there is apparently an arguable case for the appellants-applicants in the present matter, so far as applicability of Section 409 of IPC is concerned. Moreover the temporary loss then caused to the bank was cleared within two months as reported. It is also argued that there is a settled distinction between the irregularity in the bank transaction and the blatant illegality committed by the officers.

¶35

3 In any event, apparently there may not be any immediate proximate hearing in all these appeals in near future and under the circumstances, the applicants can be released on bail. Hence the order:

¶36

3/4

¶37

¶38

26)APPA625-628,645.15

¶39

All the applications are allowed. All the applicants be

¶40

released on same bail as granted by the trial Court with fresh bonds to be executed before the trial Court.

¶41

4 In view of disposal of bail applications, the applications No. 626/2015 and 628/2015 for suspensions of sentence do not survive and are disposed of accordingly.

¶42

5 Parties to act on authenticated copy of this Order.

¶43

md.saleem

¶44

4/4

Y. Jitendra v. CBI (Bs and Fc)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Y. Jitendra v. CBI (Bs and Fc)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bilkis Bilal Khanbande Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Aarif Badshaha Patel and Ors.

Ajayisngh Kuvarsingh Dahiya Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Sanjay Taru Wagh and Anr.

Sameer Vasant Shigwan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhimrao Jagannath Koli Vs the State of Maharashtra