Partly allowed

Sarupan Kumar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC16 Dec 2022ABA/1121/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court considered an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. The applicant faced charges of cheating and criminal breach of trust. The court confirmed earlier interim bail, granting three months to deposit the remaining alleged amount received and allowing the State to seek cancellation if unpaid.

What did the court decide?

Confirmation of interim anticipatory bail. Three months time granted to deposit the remaining alleged amount.

Sarupan Kumar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

1/3

¶2

906-ABA-1121-22.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1121 OF 2022

¶5

Sarupam Kumar …Applicant V/s.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra

¶7

...Respondent

¶8

Mr. Varun Thokal, for the Applicant.

¶9

Ms. Veera Shinde, APP, for the Respondent/State.

¶10

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 16^th DECEMBER, 2022.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

This is an application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for anticipatory bail.

¶13

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 30 of 2022 registered at Deccan Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶14

This Court on 25/04/2022, passed the following order:

¶15

“1. The learned APP submitted that still investigation is in progress and it requires some time to record statement of all relevant witnesses.

¶16

Applicant’s learned counsel seeks for interim protection.

¶17

It is the prosecution case that the applicant was acting as an agent and he accepted money from some people including informant for arranging

1/3

A. J. Vallakati

2/3

906-ABA-1121-22.doc

¶22

admission in medical college. Applicant’s learned counsel submitted that he has only received Rs.15,00,000/- and the rest of the amount has been transmitted to other co-accused. It is the submission that in fact the applicant was cheated by others. Upon instructions, the applicant’s learned counsel submitted that the applicant would deposit 50 % of amount i.e. Rs.7,50,000/in this court to show his bonafides. In view of that, applicant’s liberty can be protected till the matter is heard of merit. Hence, following interim order:-

¶23

(a) In the event of arrest, the Applicant/Accused namely – Sarupam Kumar in Crime No.30 of 2022 registered at Deccan Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, he be released on interim bail on his furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶24

(b)The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station one very Sunday in between 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon to facilitate the investigation till further order.

¶25

(c)Applicant shall deposit amount of Rs.7,50,000/- in this court within one week from today.

¶26

(d)The applicant/accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶27

(e)Interim protection shall remain in force till next date.

¶28

(f)Sand over on 16^th June, 2022.”

2/3

A. J. Vallakati

3/3

906-ABA-1121-22.doc

¶33

The learned APP submits that the applicant has received total amount of Rs. 21,00,000/-. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is willing to deposit rest of the amount, however, he be granted reasonable time.

¶34

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and as the applicant has shown his willingness to deposit the entire amount allegedly received by him, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant by order dated 25/04/2022, is hereby confirmed.

¶35

The applicant is granted three months time to deposit rest of the amount, in this Court.

¶36

The State is at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail, if the amount is not deposited.

¶37

[N.R.BORKAR, J.]

¶38

3/3

¶39

A. J. Vallakati

Sarupan Kumar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarupan Kumar 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

Rijhav Rajeev Chitkara Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ramdas Bhimaji Ozarkar Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Subhash Sadashiv Pawar Vs State of Maharashtra

Ramesh Vyankatesh Devgirikar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prabhakar Gulab Madane and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashutosh Sharad Misal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.