Allowed

Yogesh Harishchandra Sagvekar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC15 Mar 2021BA/785/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Bail Application sought release of an applicant accused of theft and cheating regarding missing chiller plants. The High Court, finding no evidence linking the applicant to the removal of property, granted bail subject to bond, sureties, and reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail on execution of Rs. 25,000 bond with sureties; directed to report police station every three months; prohibited from tampering with evidence; provisiona

Yogesh Harishchandra Sagvekar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

4-BA-785-2021.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 785 OF 2021

¶4

Yogesh Harishchandra Sagvekar … Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶5

Ms. P. B. Shinde h/f. Mr. Sunny Aaron Waskar, Advocate for the
Applicant.

¶6

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

¶7

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE: 15th MARCH, 2021

¶8

PER COURT:

¶9

Digitally signed by RajeP. RajeP. AherDate: Aher 2021.03.19 11:05:38 +0530

¶10

1.This is an application for bail in C.R. No. 341 of 2019
registered with Bangur Nagar Police Station, Mumbai for offences
under Sections 379, 408 & 413 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
The First Information Report (for short “FIR”) was registered on
30th September, 2019. The applicant was arrested on 21st September,
2020.

¶11

2.The case of the prosecution is that petition for
appointment of official liquidator was filed by Megha Soft Ltd. The
property belonging to Loop Mobile India Co. Ltd. was the subject
matter of this proceedings. The High Court had appointed official
liquidator. The property which is subject matter of the FIR was

¶12

1 of 4

¶13

Sajakali Jamadar

¶14

4-BA-785-2021.doc

¶15

situated at Eureka Towers. It was a secured asset with the IDBI Bank.
Mr. Ashok R. Mane was appointed to handover the property to IDBI
Bank. Chiller plants belonging to Loop Mobile India Company were
situated on the terrace of Eureka Towers. The said plants were found
missing on 16th July, 2019. The applicant was appointed as property
manager in the building, where the aforesaid property was situated.
It is alleged that the chiller plants were removed from the premises
with the help of crane and the vehicle for transporting it and it was
sold for an amount of Rs.7 Lakhs. The applicant was arrested and
cash of Rs.2 Lakhs was recovered from his possession. The amount of
Rs. 3,50,000/- was also recovered from the co-accused. It is alleged
that the applicant was involved in removing the property and selling
it to another person. Statement of witnesses were recorded. On
completing investigation, charge-sheet is filed.

¶16

3.Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the
applicant has been arrested on suspicion. There is no evidence to
connect him with the crime. There is every possibility that some
other person is involved in commission of crime. The property
involved is huge and it was not possible to remove it without
knowledge of security guards and the members of the society. The
applicant had no authority to sell or remove the said property. The
applicant has been made scapegoat.

¶17

2 of 4

¶18

Sajakali Jamadar

¶19

4-BA-785-2021.doc

¶20

4.Learned APP submitted that there is evidence against the
applicant. He was working as property manger in the premises. He is
involved in scribbling on the register to destroy the entry as to whom
the property was handedover. The statement of witnesses discloses
the complicity of the applicant. Amount of Rs.2 Lakhs has been
recovered from the applicant. Cash is also recovered from the co-
accused who was acting in connivance with the applicant.

¶21

5.The applicant is in custody from the date of arrest.
Investigation is complete and the charge-sheet is filed. There are no
criminal antecedents against the applicant. The applicant was
working as property manager. It is debatable whether the applicant is
involved in commission of offence. Nobody has seen applicant had
removing the property. It is alleged that the register/vendor book
was scribbled. Statement of witnesses also indicate that there is
possibility that some other person is involved in this crime. It is also
matter of record that inventory produced by the concerned person
for removing the property including the chiller plants. There is no
evidence to link the recovered amount with the crime. The vendor to
whom property was sold has not been arrested. The charge-sheet is
filed. Further detention of the applicant is not warranted. Hence,
case for grant of bail is made out. Hence, I pass the following order:

¶22

3 of 4

¶23

Sajakali Jamadar

¶24

4-BA-785-2021.doc

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(i) Criminal Bail Application No. 785 of 2021 is allowed;

¶27

(ii) The applicant is directed to be released on bail in
connection with C.R. No. 341 of 2019 registered with Bangur
Nagar Police Station, Mumbai on executing P.R. Bond in the
sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like
amount;

¶28

(iii)The applicant shall report concerned Police Station once
in three month on first Saturday of the month between 11:00
a.m. to 1:00 p.m. till further order;

¶29

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence.

¶30

(v) The applicant is permitted to furnish provisional cash bail security in the sum of Rs.25,000/- for a period of eight weeks in lieu of surety.

¶31

(vi) Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

¶33

4 of 4

¶34

Sajakali Jamadar

Yogesh Harishchandra Sagvekar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh Harishchandra Sagvekar 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

Amar Bashir Bashinde Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amit Nana Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra

Y. v. Reddy Vs the State of Maharashtra

Naved Salim Vora Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pinkesh Akhilesh Chaurasiya Vs the State of Maharashtra

Neelam Vinayak Monde and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra