The court rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by two engineers accused of misappropriation and presenting false measurements in a water pipeline project. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence of fraud against public funds.
Application for pre-arrest bail rejected; the matter is dismissed.
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.
910.ABA140_2017.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION No. 140 OF 2017
Sandesh Damodar Jangam & Anr. Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
... Applicants
... Respondent
Mr. Vishal Patil, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa, APP for the State.
CORAM : MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: 25th January, 2017.
P.C.:
1 / 3
910.ABA140_2017.doc
completion of the work, it was necessary for Sectional Engineer Ramesh Kamble to keep the factual record of the measurements and so also it was the duty of Deputy Engineer Mr. Sandesh Jangam to recheck the work and see that the work is completed as per the report and scheme. However, when the work of water pipeline was at the last stage, one Vidyadhar Dattatray Salunkhe gave complaint about the lapses and quality of the work. Thereafter Mr. Satish Pandurang Sohani, Deputy Engineer, Rural Water Supply Department. Guhagarh went to the spot on 19th July, 2016 and examined the entire scheme and pipelines in the said scheme and noted down that there were many lapses and so also it was a sub-quality work. The report highlighted the instances of lapses or non-compliance of the work. The amount which was sanctioned and collected out of donation from the people was Rs.41,12,813/-. As per measurement book, the work shown was of Rs.38,36,408/-, however, after physical inspection it was found that the work was not done even of Rs.20,45,178/-. It is also found that the contractor Laxman, who is co-accused, has submitted bogus bills. Thereafter the complaint was lodged against the accused persons.
2 / 3
910.ABA140_2017.doc
(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)
3 / 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to applicants accused of misappropriation in a public works contract.
Whether the prima facie case against applicants requires custodial interrogation or bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sandesh Damodar Jangam & Anr.
The State of Maharashtra
Mridula Bhatkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
