Allowed

Ramdas Bhausaheb Kanade and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC28 Nov 2023ABA/1386/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application, the court examined allegations of fake resolutions and signatures by the informant against the applicants. The court held that initiating criminal proceedings based solely on signature differences without exhausting remedies with the Assistant Charity Commissioner amounted to an abuse of process of law.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application allowed in terms of interim order.

Ramdas Bhausaheb Kanade and Another Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

aba1386.23.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1386 OF 2023

¶5

Ramdas Bhausaheb Kanade

¶6

Swati Milind Kanade Applicants

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra & another

¶9

Respondents

¶10

Mr. P. K. Palve, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. S. B. Jadhav, APP for the State. Mr. A. S. Kakade, Advocate for the informant.

¶11

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3526 OF 2023

¶12

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 28^th NOVEMBER, 2023.

¶13

PER COURT :

¶14

At the outset, learned counsel Kakade states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the informant. Having regard to the nature of offence, he is permitted to assist learned APP.

¶15

Applicants are apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 00964/2023, registered with Tophkhana Police Station, District Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 199, 200, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶16

¶17

aba1386.23.odt

¶18

Sachin Kanade lodged report alleging that his father Ratan Kanade is the Chairman of Shalini Pratishthan. According to him, on 10^th August, 2020, he applied for the documents from the office of Assistant Charitt Commissioner in respect of said Pratishthan and it was revealed to him that on 10^th Januart, 2020, bogus resolution was passed bt Ramdas Kanade, Chetan Kanade and Swati Kanade. It is also alleged that bogus signatures of his father as well as informant were done on the affidavit which was allegedlt executed in presence of Notart. It is claimed that on the basis of these false documents, the accused persons have obtained approval of the change report.

¶19

Learned counsel for applicants submits that father of the informant had lodged written complaint bearing No. 331/2023, with Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmednagar, wherein no allegation is made against applicants herein. It is stated that in the said complaint, it is specificallt recorded bt the father of the informant that in the proceeding for change report before the Assistant Charitt Commissioner, no objection was recorded and pursis was filed to that effect. It is his further submission that the roznama of the Assistant

¶20

¶21

aba1386.23.odt

¶22

Charitt Commissioner in respect of the concerned proceedings indicates presence of informant and his father in filing of no objection for approval of change report. It is also pointed out that change report was filed bt Chetan Kanade who is not applicant before this Court.

¶23

Learned counsel for informant as well as learned APP opposed the application mainlt on the contention that there is difference in the signature of informant as well as his father on the affidavit before the Assistant Charitt Commissioner.

¶24

Complaint in writing made before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmednagar does not refer to name of applicant No. 2 herein. Though it states that proceedings were filed bt Chetan Kanade and Ramdas Kanade, however, order dated 21^st September, 2021 passed bt the Assistant Charitt Commissioner in Application No. 133/2020 shows that application was filed bt Chetan Kanade onlt. The documents placed on record bt informant also substantiate that informant and his father had appeared before the Assistant Charitt Commissioner in person and through their advocate and pursis was filed which is recorded in the roznama. All

¶25

aba1386.23.odt

¶26

these facts clearlt indicate that if ant grievance was to be made bt informant or his father in respect of said no objection or order passed bt the Assistant Charitt Commissioner, the same ought to have been made before the said authoritt. Merelt bt citing some difference in signature, it cannot be permitted to the informant to lodge report with the police and initiate criminal proceeding in this manner. There is nothing on record to indicate that ant grievance is made bt informant or his father before Assistant Charitt Commissioner or said authoritt has been asked to verift the correctness of affidavit/no objection. Apparentlt, lodging of report to police is abuse of process of law. In ant case, all the documents are with the Assistant Charitt Commissioner. Nothing is to be recovered at the instance of the applicants. Hence, application is allowed in terms of the interim order.

¶27

( R. M. JOSHI) Judge

¶28

dtb

Ramdas Bhausaheb Kanade and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramdas Bhausaheb Kanade and Another 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

Pintu @ Devidas Waman Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sujit Madhukar Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhushan Vitthal Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd., through Authorized Officer Durgesh Amardeep Nirwan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jitendra Diwakar Ogale and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohammad Abdul Tahemeem Abdul Aleem Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another