Dismissed

Shreeram Agarwal S/O. Keshavdev Agarwal v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Jul 2021ABA/1482/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC (implied context of bail) because the applicant failed to deposit the ordered amount of Rs. 10 Lakhs and did not comply with the direction to appear before the investigating officer, indicating a lack of bona fides in an FIR alleging cheating.

What did the court decide?

The application for anticipatory bail was rejected.

Shreeram Agarwal S/O. Keshavdev Agarwal Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

 : 1 :

¶2

 30.ABA-1482-21.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1482 OF 2021

¶5

Shreeram Agarwal Keshavdev Agarwal.... Applicant
 Versus
The State of Maharashtra.... Respondent

¶6

Mr. Anand Mishra, Advocate i/b. Ashok M. Saraogi, for the
Applicant.

¶7

Mr. H.J. Dedhia, APP for the Respondent-State.

¶8

CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 19^th JULY, 2021 [Through Video Conferencing]

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

1.The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in

¶11

connection with C.R.No.539/2021 dated 7.6.2021 registered

¶12

at Dindoshi Police Station, Mumbai under sections 406, 420,
506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

2.The FIR is lodged by the first informant Irshad

¶14

Salmani on 7.6.2021. The gist of the FIR is that he got
acquainted with the present applicant as the applicant used to
have hair cut in the informant’s saloon. In 2019, the applicant
suggested that the informant should invest his amount in a
good scheme. He suggested that he could help the informant

¶15

1 of 3

¶16

Deshmane (PS)

¶17

 : 2 : 30.ABA-1482-21.odt

¶18

in purchasing the applicant’s own flat at Goregaon. For that
purpose, he suggested that he could give Rs.33 lakhs as loan
amount to the informant which the informant had to repay as
purchase money. The informant went on paying cash and
money through on line transfer and in all Rs.23,88,307/-
were paid by the informant to the applicant. The applicant
had not returned the money. No flat was given to the
informant and, therefore, this FIR is lodged.

¶19

3.Heard Shri Anand Mishra, learned counsel for the
applicant and Shri H.J. Dedhia, learned APP for the State.

¶20

4.Vide order dated 30.6.2021 passed by this Court
(Coram: Prakash D.Naik, J.), the Court had recorded that the
applicant had made a statement that he would deposit amount
of Rs.10 Lakhs within two weeks from that order to show his
bonafides. The applicant was also directed to attend the
investigting officer on 7th, 8th and 9th July, 2021 between 11:00
a.m. to 1:00 p.m..

¶21

5.Learned APP, on instructions, stated that no such
amount is deposited by the applicant and the applicant has not

¶22

2 of 3

¶23

 : 3 : 30.ABA-1482-21.odt

¶24

attended the police station as directed.

¶25

6. Learned counsel for the applicant also accepted the

¶26

fact that the applicant has not deposited the amount of Rs.10
Lakhs as recorded in the order dated 30.6.2021.

¶27

7.I have considered this situation and the allegations
in the FIR. The FIR clearly makes out offence committed by
the present applicant. The informant was cheated to the
aforementioned amount. No explanation is given by the
applicant. He has not complied with the order of the Court.
He has not complied with his own undertaking and he has not
reported to the investigating officer. Therefore, he does not
deserve any protection of anticipatory bail. The application is
rejected.

¶28

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶29

Deshmane (PS)

¶30

3 of 3

Shreeram Agarwal S/O. Keshavdev Agarwal v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shreeram Agarwal S/O. Keshavdev Agarwal 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

Murukraj Unnikrishnan Nair Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pravin Sudam Nikalje and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nasir Ahmed Kaleemi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Wahid Muqhtar Shaikh @ Shaikh Vahid Ahmed Mukhtar Ahmed Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Vishwas David Valvi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gautam Shyamsundar Lath Vs the State of Maharashtra