Allowed

Rajendra Rangnath Gaware v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC7 Apr 2016APPLN/1454/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for interim bail against accusations of cheating and forging receipts under IPC and Essential Commodities Act. Court found no need for custodial interrogation and made interim protection absolute.

What did the court decide?

The interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 14th March, 2016 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions.

Rajendra Rangnath Gaware Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

criapln1454-2016

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1454 OF 2016

¶5

Rajendra Rangnath Gaware,
Age : 50 years, Occu. Business,
R/o Yeola Road, Kopargaon,
Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The State of Maharashtra
through the Police Inspector,
Kopargaon City Police Station,
Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar

¶8

RESPONDENT

¶9

Mr. V.D. Hon, Senior Advocate instructed by
Mr. A.V. Hon, Advocate for the applicant
Mr. U.S. Mote, A.P.P. for the respondent-State

¶10

 CORAM: M.T. JOSHI, J.
 DATE : 07/04/2016

¶11

ORAL ORDER :

¶12

1. Heard both sides.

¶13

2.The present applicant who is apprehending his

¶14

arrest at the hands of Kopargaon City Police Station,
District Ahmednagar in Crime No. I-10/2016, registered

¶15

for the offences punishable under section 420, 465 of
the Indian Penal Code and under section 3, 7 of the
Essential Commodities Act, is praying for his release on

¶16

criapln1454-2016

¶17

¶18

bail in the event of his arrest.

¶19

3.The allegations against the present applicant
are that on 18th January, 2016, the Tahsildar, Kopargaon
at 11.20 a.m. inspected the fair price shop of the
present applicant. At that time, 10.18 quintals of
wheat and 5.8 quintals of rice were found surplus upon
comparing with the register of distribution. In the
circumstances, it was alleged that the present applicant
has managed to prepare forged receipts and therefore,
the offence came to be registered.

¶20

4.Mr. V.D. Hon, learned senior counsel for the
applicant submitted that in fact, there was no excess
stock of wheat and rice in the shop. Only entry in the
register was remained to be made. He further files on
record the true copy of the order issued by the Deputy
Commissioner (Supply) of Nasik Division, dated 22nd
March, 2016. The same is accepted on record and marked
“X” for the purpose of identification.

¶21

5.The above referred order dated 22nd March, 2016
would show that upon making detailed enquiry, it was
found that there was contradiction in the panchanama

¶22

criapln1454-2016

¶23

¶24

recorded by the police inspector and the panchanama

¶25

prepared by the Tahsildar regarding the surplus grains
found in the shop.

¶26

6.Considering all the material on record, in my
view, the custodial interrogation of the present
applicant is not required. Hence, the following order:-

¶27

7.The interim protection granted by this Court to
the present applicant, vide order dated 14th March, 2016
is hereby made absolute on the same terms and
conditions.

¶28

.The present application is accordingly allowed
and disposed of.

¶29

[M.T. JOSHI]
 JUDGE

¶30

npj/criapln1454-2016

Rajendra Rangnath Gaware v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Rangnath Gaware 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

Subhash S/O Vaijnath Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashok S/O. Sampatrao Kutwal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sona @ Arjun S/O. Vishvnath Raut Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sagar S/O. Suresh @ Bapu Adhagale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amol Subhash Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prashant S/O. Ganesh Gawai Vs the State of Maharashtra