This court dismissed an application for anticipatory bail in a case involving fraudulent inducement and dishonoured cheques, observing that the applicant took contrary stands and custodial interrogation was necessary.
Application dismissed and prior interim protection granted on 29/03/2016 was vacated.
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.
(1) Cr. Appln. 1288-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1288 OF 2016
Ashok S/o Anaji Wakchaure,
Age 46 years, Occu. Leather work
R/o. Jorve, Tq. Sangamner,
District Ahmednagar.. Applicant
Vs.
1] The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Inspector,
Sangamner City Police Station,
Tq. Sangamner, District Ahmednagar
2] Ashok S/o Shivaji Mhaske,
Age : 50 years, Occu.: Business,
R/o Vakil Colony, Sangamner,
Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar.. Respondents
Mr. V.D. Hon, Sr. Advocate i/b Mr. Ashwin V. Hon, Advocate
for the applicant
Mr. U.S. Mote, A.P.P. for the respondent-State
Mr. R.N. Dhorde, Sr. Advocate i/b Mr. V.R. Dhorde, Advocate
for respondent no.2
CORAM: M.T. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 15/04/2016
ORAL ORDER :
Heard both sides.
2.The present applicant, who is apprehending
arrest at the hands of Sangamner City Police Station,
Dist. Ahmednagar in crime no. I-235 of 2015 for the
(2) Cr. Appln. 1288-2016
offences punishable under section 420, 504, 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, is praying for his release on bail,
in the event of his arrest.
3.The prosecution allegations in nut-shell are
that the present applicant is an active politician, who
had represented to the complainant that his son would
be appointed in the Railway as an Engineer. Time to
time, he took the complainant to Delhi and on
occasions, received an amount of Rs.10 Lakhs.
He however thereafter started avoiding the complainant
and ultimately, he issued three cheques towards the
refund of the said amount of Rs.10 Lakhs. Out of the
said cheques, only one cheque of Rs.2 Lakhs was
honoured and all other cheques were dis-honoured.
In the circumstances, the complaint came to be filed,
on the basis of which the crime was registered.
4.Mr. Hon, learned Sr. Advocate i/b Mr. A.V.
Hon, learned counsel for the applicant submitted before
me that in-fact, there was no transaction between the
complainant and the applicant. One Mr. Yadav Trimbak
Pawse had entered into the contract of sale and
purchase of immovable property with him and in-fact,
(3) Cr. Appln. 1288-2016
the genesis of the present complaint is the said sale
deed. He further submits that the complainant's son is
already employed with a private college as an Assistant
Professor and, therefore, the case of the complainant
that for securing the job of Engineer in Railway for
the complainant's son, money is paid, is false.
He further submits that only due to the political
rivalry, the applicant was involved in a false
allegation.
5.On the other hand, learned A.P.P. as well as
Mr. V.R. Dhorde, learned Sr. Advocate i/b Mr. V.R.
Dhorde, learned counsel assisting the A.P.P. submit
that the record would show that three cheques were
issued by the applicant, out of which one cheque could
only be encashed. All the cheques are in the name of
the present applicant. Not only this, the present
applicant, time to time made false statements, as could
be seen from the copy of the application that was filed
before the Sessions Court at Sangamner and another
application filed in the Sessions Court at Nasik
unnecessarily. He submits that from time to time the
applicant is shifting his stands. Now fresh stand of
(4) Cr. Appln. 1288-2016
agreement with third party is taken, which is against
these two applications. It was further pointed out
that the application before the Sessions Court at
Sangamner was dismissed. Thereafter the applicant
without approaching this Court, has filed similar
application for grant of anticipatory bail in the
Sessions Court at Nasik and in the said application,
false statements are made that when the applicant was
at Nasik, at that time, he got the information of
registration of the crime through various newspapers,
while in-fact, already his application for grant of
anticipatory bail was dismissed by the Sessions Court
at Sangamner.
6.Upon hearing both sides, and taking into
consideration all the facts on record and more
particularly that the present applicant is taking
contrary stands at different stages, as detailed supra,
while the complainant's case is corroborated by number
of documents like dis-honoured cheques and the copy of
visiting card, showing that the present applicant was
on the Consultative Committee of the Railway Department
during the relevant period, in my view, the custodial
(5) Cr. Appln. 1288-2016
interrogation of the present applicant would be
required to make further investigation. In the
circumstances, the following order:-
7. The Application is hereby dismissed.
8. Interim protection granted to the applicant by
this Court vide order dated 29/03/2016 is hereby
vacated.
9.Amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh)
deposited by the applicant in this Court, as a
condition precedent for granting interim protection, be
refunded to him.
arp/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application for anticipatory bail should be granted or dismissed.
Whether the custodial interrogation of the applicant is required for further investigation.
Ashok S/o Anaji Wakchaure
The State of Maharashtra
Ashok S/o Shivaji Mhaske
M.T. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court