Allowed

Arjun Haribhau Pawar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Mar 2021BA/112/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail applications filed by Ganesh Shinde and Arjun Pawar in a case involving alleged cheating and criminal breach of trust by Capital Club Traders. The court emphasized their subordinate roles compared to the absconding proprietor and granted permission for provisional cash bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on executing P.R. bond of Rs.50,000/- each with sureties; permission to furnish provisional cash bail of Rs.50,000/- for eight weeks.

Arjun Haribhau Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

2 BA 30-2021 aw BA 112-2021.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 30 OF 2021

¶4

Ganesh Rajendra Shinde … Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶7

Mr. Mandar Mahesh Goswami, for the Applicant. Mr. A. R. Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent – State.

¶8

WITH

¶9

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 112 OF 2021

¶10

Arjun Haribhau Pawar

¶11

Versus

¶12

The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶13

Mr. Ashok Mundargi, Senior Advocate i/b. Mr. Sidheshwar Biradar, for the Applicant.

¶14

Mr. A. R. Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent – State.

¶15

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 24^th MARCH, 2021

¶16

PC :

¶17

. The applicants in both these applications are seeking bail in

¶18

connection with C.R.No.I-394/2019 registered with Vashi Police

¶19

Station, Dist. Thane for offences punishable under Sections 420, 409,

¶20

1 of 4

¶21

Manjusha

¶22

2 BA 30-2021 aw BA 112-2021.odt

¶23

34 of Indian Penal Code. The applicant Ganesh Shinde was arrested on 7^th November 2019. Applicant Arjun Pawar was arrested on 14^th November 2019.

¶24

The case of the prosecution is that in July 2019 onwards the Company named Capital Club Traders situated at Real Tech Park Building Vashi, Navi Mumbai had induced several investors to invest the amount with promise of attractive returns. The proprietor of the company Ravindra Chaoudhary who is absconding. The applicant Ganesh Shinde was purportedly acting as gold executive. The applicant Arjun Pawar was allegedly acting as a team leader/agent. It is alleged that amount of about Rs.14 Crores was collected and misappropriated.

¶25

Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mundargi and learned Counsel Mr. Goswami submitted that the applicants are in custody for a substantial period of time. They were acting as team leader/agent and/or employee. Ganesh Shinde was paid salary. No amount was credited to personal account of the applicants.

¶26

Learned APP submitted that the statement of several investors were recorded. They have disclosed that the applicants were present in the office whenever they had visited. The applicants had

¶27

2 of 4

¶28

Manjusha

¶29

2 BA 30-2021 aw BA 112-2021.odt

¶30

introduced the scheme. Main accused is absconding.

¶31

The amount which was collected from the investors was deposited into the account of Capital Club Traders. The applicants were not authorized signatories to operate the account. It is not the case of the prosecution that the applicants had withdrawn any amount. No amount was found credited into their accounts. The Bank account of Capital Club Traders was frozen during investigation and approximately amount of Rs.2 Crores were found lying. During the course of investigation, statements of several witnesses were recorded. The applicants are in custody for a substantial period of time. Considering the role attributed to them, further detention of applicants is not necessary.

¶32

Hence, I pass following order.

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

(i) Criminal Bail Application No.30 of 2021 and Criminal Bail Application No.112 of 2021 are allowed.

¶35

(ii) The applicants are directed to be released on bail in C.R.No.I-394/2019 registered with Vashi Police Station, Navi Mumbai, on executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount;

¶36

3 of 4

¶37

Manjusha

¶38

2 BA 30-2021 aw BA 112-2021.odt

¶39

(iii) The applicants shall report the concerned Police Station once in three months on 1^st Saturday of month between 11.00 a.m. to 01.00 p.m. till further order;

¶40

(iv) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence;

¶41

(v) The applicants are permitted to furnish provisional cash bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- for a period of eight weeks;

¶42

(vi) Criminal Bail Application No.30 of 2021 and Criminal Bail Application No.112 of 2021 stands disposed of accordingly.

¶43

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

¶44

4 of 4

¶45

Manjusha

Arjun Haribhau Pawar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Haribhau Pawar 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

Mayur Ramabhai Bhandari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Farhan Raza Rafiullah Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dayashankar Bagwatiprasad Dubey Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vinay Ramjanam Giri Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ganesh Raju Vishwasrao Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sagar Baburao Dhulap Vs the State of Maharashtra