Allowed

Dhanaji Gundu Kasalkar and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC23 Sept 2021ABA/1801/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Goa, Daman and Diu High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application. The court noted that the investigation was nearly complete and specimen handwriting obtained, making custodial interrogation unnecessary. Bail was granted on furnishing a bond.

What did the court decide?

The application was allowed; the applicants are directed to be released on bail upon arrest by furnishing a PR bond of Rs.30,000/- each with one or more sureties and to attend the investigating office

Dhanaji Gundu Kasalkar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2-Aba-1801-2021.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1801 OF 2021

¶4

1. Dhanaji Gundu Kasalkar

¶5

2. Tanaji Gundu Kasalkar… Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶6

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2203 OF 2021

¶7

IN

¶8

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1801 OF 2021

¶9

Sanjay Santu Gore & Anr. … Applicants
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Dhanaji Gundu Kasalkar& Anr.… Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶10

Mr. Mangesh Patil, Advocate for the Applicants.
Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent – State.
Mr. Shantanu Raktate, Advocate for Intervenors.

¶11

Mr. Ganesh Jadhav, (P.S.I.) N. M. Joshi Marg Police Station, Present.

¶12

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE: 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶13

PER COURT:

¶14

1.This is an application for anticipatory bail in C.R.

¶15

No.437 of 2019 registered with N.M. Joshi Marg Police Station,

¶16

Digitally signed by SAJAKALI SAJAKALI LIYAKAT LIYAKAT JAMADAR JAMADAR Date:2021.09.27 18:19:03 +0530

¶17

Mumbai on 23rd December, 2019. The offences were registered
under Sections 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477(A) r/w Section 34 of
Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”).

¶18

1 of 4

¶19

Sajakali Jamadar

¶20

2-Aba-1801-2021.doc

¶21

2.The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that during
the financial year 2012-13 to 2016-17, the then chairman
Sakharam Appa Chavan and the present chairman Dhanaji Gundu
Kasalkar, Vice Chairnam Krushna Dhondiba Yejare, Treasurer and
Ex-Vice Chairman Sanjay Gore, Secretary Tanaji Kasalkar, the then
Administrator Arvind Kumbhar, Expert Director Krushna Chorge,
the present Director Ramchandra Kokate of M/s. Shree Jomadevi
Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. had in connivance with each other
and false entries were made in the registers and prepared false
documents and withdrawn the amount which was misappropriated.
The total amount of Rs. Rs.1,42,848/- was misappropriated.

¶22

3.The applicants were granted interim protection vide
order 5th August, 2021. Thereafter, the application come up for
hearing on 20th September, 2021. The order dated 20th September,
2021 records that learned APP on instructions submitted that
investigation is almost completed. Specimen handwriting of both
the applicants has been obtained by the Investigating Officer.

¶23

4.The co-accused Sanjay Gore and Sakharam Chavan
who were Ex-Vice Chairman and Ex-Chairman respectively had
preferred intervention application. Learned counsel appearing for
the intervenor submitted that the application for anticipatory bail
preferred by the said intervenors are pending before the Sessions

¶24

2 of 4

¶25

Sajakali Jamadar

¶26

2-Aba-1801-2021.doc

¶27

Court. It is submitted that while granting interim protection to the
applicants in this application vide order dated 5th August, 2021, the
submissions of learned counsel for the applicants in the present
application were recorded wherein it was mentioned that the
applicants in this application were implicated at the behest of
former chairman who was predecessor of applicant No.1 and on
account of rivalry both are implicated. It is submitted that any
observation in the order of this Court would hamper the fate of the
application preferred by the applicants before the Sessions Court.

¶28

5.Learned counsel for the applicants however submitted
that the intervenors are granted interim relief by the Sessions Court
by order dated 13th August, 2021. The said order indicates that the
interim order passed by this Court dated 5th August, 2021 was
pointed out by the learned Sessions Judge and they were granted
protection.

¶29

6.On perusal of the order dated 5th August, 2021 it is
apparent that the Court has not given any findings against
intervenor. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants
therein was recorded. Since the intervenors are apprehending that
the contents of the order dated 5th August, 2021 would caused
prejudice to them by way of caution it is clarified that this Court
has not given any final findings against intervenor and the Sessions

¶30

3 of 4

¶31

Sajakali Jamadar

¶32

2-Aba-1801-2021.doc

¶33

Court may not draw any adverse inference against them. Their
applications be decided on merits.

¶34

7.The order dated 20th September, 2021 indicate that
investigation is almost completed and the specimen hand writing of
the applicants has been obtained by the Investigating Officer. Thus,
custodial interrogation of the applicants is not necessary.

¶35

8.Hence, I pass the following order:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

(i) Anticipatory Bail Application No.1801 of 2021 is
allowed;

¶38

(ii) In the event of arrest of the applicants in Anticipatory
Bail Application No.1801 of 2021 in connection with C.R.
No.437 of 2019 registered with N.M. Joshi Marg Police
Station, Mumbai, the applicants be released on bail on
furnishing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each with one
or more sureties in the like amount;

¶39

(iii)The applicants shall attend the investigating officer as
and when called for.

¶40

(iv)Anticipatory Bail Application and Interim Application
stands disposed of accordingly.

¶41

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

¶42

4 of 4

¶43

Sajakali Jamadar

Dhanaji Gundu Kasalkar and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanaji Gundu Kasalkar and Anr. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Hussain Yusuf Agarbattiwala and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Manoj Dattatray Mestri Vs the State of Maharashtra

Manoj Dattatray Mestri Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Captain Rupali Waghmare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashish Balkrishna Gupta Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Karan Ajay Mehra Vs the State of Maharashtra