Allowed

Suresh Sitaram Ghangale and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC22 Dec 2022BA/2841/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail applications filed by three accused individuals involved in an identical crime. The court ordered their release on bail with execution of a bond and sureties, imposing standard conditions regarding presence, witness interference, and property attachment.

What did the court decide?

Applicants were released on bail with execution of a P.R. bond in the sum of Rs. 2 Lakhs each with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

Suresh Sitaram Ghangale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Money Laundering | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

903-ba-2848-2841-22IA3697-22.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2841 OF 2022

¶3

Suresh S. Ghangale 2. Santosh S. Korde …Applicants V/s.

¶4

State of Maharashtra

¶5

...Respondent.

¶6

AND INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3697 OF 2022

¶7

WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2848 OF 2022 Nilesh J. Kumbhar …Applicant V/s.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent.

¶9

Mr. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicants in BA 2841/22. Mr. Ajit D. Hon for the Applicant in BA 2848/22. Mr. A.A. Palkar, APP for the Respondent/State.

¶10

Ms Sonali R. Chavan i/b Mr. Aditya P. Kharkar for the Intervener in I.A. 3697/22.

¶11

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 22.12.2022.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

As both these applications for bail fled under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure are arising out of one and same crime, they are being disposed of by this common order.

¶14

The applicants came to be arrested in Crime No.201 of 2019 registered at Aalephata Police Station, Dist. Pune for the ofences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 and Sections 3,

¶15

1/4

¶16

Dinesh S. Sherla

¶17

903-ba-2848-2841-22IA3697-22.doc

¶18

4, 5 and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

¶19

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned APP for the respondent – State and the learned counsel for the intervener.

¶20

The learned counsel for the applicant has placed on record the copy of the order passed by this court dated 10 October 2022 in Criminal Bail Application No. 2025 of 2022 with other connected bail applications. By the said order this Court has released the other co-accused on bail. It is submitted that the role attributed to the present applicants and to the co-accused to whom this Court has granted bail is identical.

¶21

I have perused the charge-sheet. It appears that the applicant in aforesaid bail application namely, Vishnu Bhagwat and present applicants were Directors alongwith other co-accused in Mauli Multistate Credit Society. The allegations against them are identical. I am therefore inclined to release the applicants on bail. In the result, the following order is passed.

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

A] Bail Applications are allowed.

¶24

B] The applicant No.1- Suresh S. Ghangale and applicant No.2 - Santosh S. Korde in Bail Application No. 2841 of 2022

¶25

2/4

¶26

Dinesh S. Sherla

¶27

903-ba-2848-2841-22IA3697-22.doc

¶28

and the applicant - Nilesh J. Kumbhar in Bail Application No.2848 of 2022 be released on bail in Crime No. 201 of 2019 registered at Aalephata Police Station, Dist. Pune for the ofences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 on execution of P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.2 Lakhs each with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

¶29

C] The Applicants shall undertake to remain present before the learned Special Court during the course of the trial.

¶30

D] The Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any attempt to infuence or temper with the prosecution evidence/witnesses.

¶31

E] The Applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, before the learned Special Court.

¶32

F] If any of the Applicants is not holding a passport, it shall be intimated to the learned Special Court, accordingly.

¶33

G] The Applicants shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency in the matter of attachment/sale of the movable and immovable properties and for realization of the

¶34

3/4

¶35

Dinesh S. Sherla

¶36

903-ba-2848-2841-22IA3697-22.doc

¶37

proceeds thereof.

¶38

H] Bail bonds to be furnished before the learned Special Court.

¶39

I] The Applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶40

6] In view of disposal of anticipatory bail application, the Interim Application No.3697 of 2022 for intervention does not survive and the same is also disposed of.

¶41

[N.R.BORKAR, J.]

¶42

4/4

¶43

Dinesh S. Sherla

Suresh Sitaram Ghangale and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Sitaram Ghangale 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Sohan Batunge Vs State of Maharashtra

Sudhir Dnyandeo Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rutik Ashok Dandanavare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rutik J Thorve Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Trupti Hukmichand Khandewal Vs State of Maharashtra

Ganesan Kaliyan Vs the State of Maharashtra