Allowed

Rajesh Tulsiram Maheshwari and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Jun 2023ABA/117/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed the anticipatory bail application and interim bail. Found no need for custodial interrogation as documents were handed over. Granted bail on furnishing bond with sureties and reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties; applicants must report to Investigating Officer and maintain contact details.

Rajesh Tulsiram Maheshwari and Anr. Vs State of… — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

33 aba 117-23.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2023

¶4

Rajesh Tulsiram Maheshwari & Anr. ..Applicants

¶5

v/s.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra . ..Respondents

¶7

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 227 OF 2023 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2023

¶8

Sushil Ramnarayan Toshniwal ..Applicant

¶9

In the matter between

¶10

Rajesh Tulsiram Maheshwari & Anr. ..Applicants

¶11

v/s.

¶12

The State of Maharashtra . ..Respondents

¶13

Mr. Niranjan Mundargi i/b. Marmik Shah for the Applicant. Mr. Prabhanjay Dave a/w. Pradeep Kumawat for the Intervenor. Mr. S.V.Gavand, APP for the State. P.I. Mr. Nitin Gije, from EOW, Unit VII.

¶14

CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI ,J. DATED : 9^th JUNE, 2023.

¶15

P.C.

¶16

This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by the aforesaid Applicants apprehending their arrest in Crime No.120 of 2022 registered with Economic Offences Wing- Unit VII, Mumbai, for offences under Section 409, 465, 467, 471 and 120-b of the Indian Penal Code.

1 of 3

SALGAONKAR

33 aba 117-23.doc

The Applicants are the Directors of M/s. Maheshwari Share & Stock Brokers Private Limited. The first information report has been lodged against the Applicants alleging that the Applicant No.1 has fradulently transferred in the name of the Applicant No.2, and thereafter to the name of Applicant No.1, the shares which were in the names of the parents and Aunt of the first informant.

¶21

Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that the relations between the father of the Applicants and the parents of the first informant were very cordial. They had kept the share certificate along with the share transfer form in the custody of the father of the Applicants. Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that he has already handed over the original share certificates along with all other documents , and share transfer forms to the Investigating Officer.

¶22

The question whether the signatures were forged, or whether the parents and Aunt of the first informant had signed the share certificate is required to be investigated. Since the documents are already handed over to the Investigating Officer, in my considered view, this would not be a case which would justify custodial interrogation. Moreover, the Applicants were on interim bail during the pendency of the Application before the Sessions Court, and the interim relief was continued by this Court vide order dated 13^th January, 2023. Learned Counsel for the Applicants state that the Applicants shall co-operate with the

2 of 3

SALGAONKAR

33 aba 117-23.doc

investigation. Considering the above facts and circumstances, the Application is allowed on the following terms and conditions:-

¶27

(i) In the event of arrest of the Applicants in Crime No.120 of 2022 registered with Economic Offences Wing- Unit VII, Mumbai, the Applicants be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twentyfive Thousand Only) each with one or two sureties in the like amount

¶28

(ii) The Applicants shall report to the Investigating Officer for two days on 14^th and 15^th June, 2023, and further as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

¶29

(iii) The Applicants shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of their current address and mobile/contact details, and/or change of residence or mobile/contact details from time to time.

¶30

(iv) The Applicants shall not interfere with the Complainant and the other witnesses, or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

¶31

. Anticipatory Bail Application along with Interim Application stand disposed of.

¶32

(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

¶33

3 of 3

¶34

SALGAONKAR

Rajesh Tulsiram Maheshwari and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Tulsiram Maheshwari and Anr. v. 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

Fr. Sabu Thomas Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mangesh Pitambar Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yasin Julfikar Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ramakant Ghanshyam Waghmare Vs State of Maharashtra

Jagdish Singh Kalusingh Bhati Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dipesh Chandrakant Kotwal Vs State of Maharashtra