Allowed

Anuradha W/O. Prakash Ransing v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC6 Jul 2023ABA/116/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to four applicants in connection with C.R. No. 369 of 2022 registered for offences under sections 420, 406, 409 IPC and others related to Maharashtra Gramin Rozgar Hami Yojana. The court allowed the applications by confirming an earlier order.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail applications allowed by confirming the order dated 25th January, 2023.

Anuradha W/O. Prakash Ransing Vs the State of… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

930.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 115 OF 2023

¶4

Prabhavati W/o. Balasaheb Lohar
and Anr

¶5

...Applicants

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 119 OF 2023

¶10

Vishwanath Dnyaneshwar Raut...Applicant

¶11

Versus

¶12

The State of Maharashtra & Anr

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2023

¶15

Vijaykumar Prakash Ransing
and Ors

¶16

...Applicants

¶17

Versus

¶18

The State of Maharashtra & Anr

¶19

...Respondents

¶20

WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 116 OF 2023

¶21

Anuradha W/o Prakash Ransing...Applicant

¶22

Versus

¶23

The State of Maharashtra & Anr

¶24

...Respondents

¶25

...

¶26

Mr. S. G. Kawade, Advocate for the Applicants in
ABA/115, 116 & 117 of 2023.

¶27

Ms. S. V. Salunke, Advocate for the Applicant in
ABA/119/2023.

¶28

Mr. V. S. Badakh, APP, for the Respondents – State.

¶29

...

¶30

Page 1 of 3

¶31

930.odt

¶32

CORAM:R.M. JOSHI, J

¶33

DATE :JULY 06, 2023

¶34

PER COURT :

¶35

1.Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with
with C.R. No. 369 OF 2022 registered with Anandnagar
Police Station, Tq & Dist. Osmanabad for the offences
punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 465, 467, 468,
470, 471, 477 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶36

2.Applicants in Applications Nos. 115, 116 and
117 of 2023 who had worked on the scheme of Maharashtra
Gramin Rozgar Hami Yojana. It is not the case of the
investigating agency that entire work is not completed.
Since, there is no dispute about the fact that some
work was definitely done, the Applicants cannot be held
liable for the misappropriation, if any.

¶37

3.As far as Applicant in ABA/119/2023 is
concerned, he is employed as data entry operator. His
job was to take entry into computer in respect of data
placed before him. There is nothing to indicate that he
was required to go on the spot and personally verify
the work completed.

¶38

4.In view of the above, applications are allowed

¶39

Page 2 of 3

¶40

930.odt

¶41

by confirming order dated 25th January, 2023.

¶42

 (R.M. JOSHI, J.)

¶43

Malani

¶44

Page 3 of 3

Anuradha W/O. Prakash Ransing v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuradha W/O. Prakash Ransing v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Gayabai Wd/O. Sadhurao Kotambe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Nityanand Jayant Bhogle Vs Sachin Uttamrao Gaikwad

Mohammed Dilshad Kaleem S/O. Mohammed Peer Pasha Ahmed Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Vijaykumar Prakash Ransing and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Prabhavati W/O. Balasaheb Lohar and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Vishwanath Dnyaneshwar Raut Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another