In a bail application, the applicant sought pre-arrest bail alleging lack of involvement in the crime. The High Court dismissed the application, denying the prayer and directing surrender within one week.
Bail application dismissed; applicant directed to surrender within one week.
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 aba745.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.745/2016
Sau. Sandhya W/o Ishwar Ambadare
..Vs..
State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., Police Station, Bhandara, Tah. and Distt. Bhandara
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders
Court's or Judge's orders
Shri R.A. Gupte, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri V.A. Thakre, A.P.P. for the respondent / State.
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.
DATE : 6.6.2017.
Heard.
The applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in crime registered against her for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4, 5 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, Section 76(1)(2)(3) of the Chit Funds Act and Section 3 of Maharashtra Investors Benefits Protection Act.
The accusations against the applicant are that she acted as Agent of the J.S.V. Developers India Limited, Bhopal and lured investors to invest amount in the company, that the complainant invested amount on the assurances given by the applicant and the amount is not paid to the complainant and other investors. According to the investigating agency, the applicant is one of the Directors of the company and in the capacity as Director
2 aba745.16
of the company she has sold a property of the company for Rs.2 Crores 10 Lakhs to Shri Ravi Partwar. According to the applicant though the sale deed of the above referred property is registered the purchaser has not paid entire amount and an amount of Rs.90,70,400/- only is received and balance amount is to be received. The applicant claims that she is not concerned with the alleged crime / offence and even after she is granted interim protection by this Court she has co-operated with the investigating agency, therefore, she may be granted pre-arrest bail.
The application is opposed on the ground that custodial interrogation of the applicant is required to unearth the truth, recover documents and to track the money received after sale of property referred above.
Considering the facts of the case, I am not inclined to grant the prayer of the applicant made in the application. The application is dismissed . The applicant, who has enjoyed protection in view of interim order passed by this Court, shall surrender within one week, failing which her conduct should be taken note of at all subsequent stages in the proceedings.
JUDGE
Tambaskar .
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted in a criminal matter involving offences under various statutes.
Whether the applicant is entitled to interim protection against arrest.
Sau. Sandhya W/o Ishwar Ambadare
State of Maharashtra
Z.A.Haq
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
