Allowed

Amitkumar Ashok Singh v. Pawan Amar Mutreja and Anr.

Bombay HC3 Mar 2022IA/412/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This brief order grants an applicant's prayer for withdrawal of Rs. 5,00,000 deposited as part of a bail bond. The Court held that since the underlying dispute was settled and the respondent was released on bail by the trial Court, the applicant was entitled to withdraw their deposited amount.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of Rs. 5,00,000 deposited by the applicant in the High Court.

Amitkumar Ashok Singh Vs Pawan Amar Mutreja and Anr. — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

Digitally signed SALGAONKAR by SALGAONKARM M M M Date: 2022.03.05 00:10:30 +0530

¶2

1/4 70 IA-412-22.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.412 OF 2022

¶4

Amitkumar Ashok Singh

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Pawan Amar Mutreja & Anr.

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

Mr.Vivek B. Rane for the Applicant/Intervenor.

¶10

Mr.Mahesh Vaswani with Ms.Shreya Tiwari, Ms.Priyanka Pal and Ms.Chitra Salunkhe i/b Ms.Dharini Nagda for the Respondent No.1.

¶11

Mr.P.H.Gaikwad, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.

¶12

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 03^rd MARCH, 2022

¶13

P.C:-

¶14

Interim Application No.412 of 2022 is taken out in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2506 of 2021.

¶15

On 30/11/2021, the protection in favour of respondent No.1 came to be extended by recording that by 01/12/2021, the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- shall be deposited in the Court and balance amount of Rs.11,50,000/- shall be deposited by 13/12/2021.

¶16

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶17

2/4 70 IA-412-22.doc

¶18

Since the said statement was not honoured, on 13/12/2021, the Court rejected the application for anticipatory bail. Subsequent to this order, on 23/01/2022, respondent No.1 came to be arrested. When he moved the application for seeking his release on bail before the JMFC, Thane, in connection with C.R.No.214 of 2021, the learned Judge passed the following order:-

¶19

“Perused the application Remand, say of IO & A.P.P. and affdavit & consent terms fled by Intervener that is informant. After perusal of CR & document it appears that Informant had allegations of fraud against present accused of Rs.16,50,000/- out of which Rs.5,00,000/- are deposited in High Court and remaining amount is paid through Demand Draft to Informant. The informant appeared before the court that he had no complaint against Accused and he has received Rs.16,50,000/- duped by Accused which can be also seen from the documents i.e. Affdavit of informant & consent terms. It appears that matter amicably settled between parties outside the court. Considering the nature of offence, affdavit & consent terms fled by Informant, I am opinion that further detention of Accused is not necessary. So far as apprehension of IO & A.P.P. is considered that can be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order.

¶20

: ORDER :

¶21

Application is hereby allowed.

¶22

Applicant/Accused-Pawan Amar Mutreja is released on PB & SB of Rs.30,000/- with one or more surety subject to following conditions :

¶23

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶24

3/4 70 IA-412-22.doc

¶25

(a) Accused/Applicant shall not leave jurisdiction of Thane without prior permission of this Court.

¶26

(b) Accused/Applicant shall co-operate with investigation.

¶27

¶28

(d) Accused/Applicant shall submit verifed copy of address proof alongwith mobile number of himself and one of his close relative.

¶29

(d) Accused/Applicant shall attend concern P.S. every frst and last Monday till fling of charge-sheet.”

¶30

The respondent, thus, stands released on bail as on today and the applicant has received the amount of Rs.11,50,000/by way of two demand drafts, which is recorded by the Court in the aforesaid order.

¶31

By the present application, the applicant is seeking withdrawal of Rs.5,00,000/-, which was deposited in this Court on 01/12/2021. The learned counsel for the respondent, has accorded his no-objection for withdrawal of the amount, since he has already made good the balance amount to the complainant.

¶32

Since the amount was intended for the applicant and respondent No.1 is released on bail by the learned Magistrate on the ground that the parties have settled the dispute amongst them, and the dispute involves monetary transaction, the applicant is entitled for the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- which has been deposited by respondent No.1 pursuant to the order

¶33

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶34

4/4 70 IA-412-22.doc

¶35

of the Court. Necessarily, Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶36

( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶37

M.M.Salgaonkar

Amitkumar Ashok Singh v. Pawan Amar Mutreja and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amitkumar Ashok Singh v. Pawan Amar Mutreja and Anr.

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

Anand Shankar Tedginkari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pravin Javaharmal Chandan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Omkar Mahindar Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Imaraj Abrar Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Chitra Ramesh Dingore Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bipin Lira Nor Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.