Allowed

Rajendra Namdeo Kamble and Another v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Jun 2023ABA/442/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed anticipatory bail applications for two data entry operators accused of reused E-challans. It held that their role did not require verifying challan genuineness, the revenue loss was recovered, and custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; interim protection granted on March 30, 2023, confirmed; liberty to appear before Investigating Officer when required.

Rajendra Namdeo Kamble and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra — Corruption | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

ABA-442-2023.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 442 OF 2023

¶4

1. Rajendra S/o Namdeo Kamble, Age : 45 years, Occ: Computer Operator, R/o. Loni, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.

¶5

2.Atul S/o. Anurath Ghodke,
Age : 40 years, Occ: Computer
Operator, R/o. Vidyanagar,
In front of Petrol Pump,
Jalkot Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir,
Dist. Latur

¶6

...Applicants

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Udgir City,

¶9

Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.

¶10

...Respondent

¶11

***

¶12

Mr. V. D. Gunale, Advocate for the Applicants.
Mr. G. O. Watamwar, APP for Respondent – State.

¶13

***

¶14

CORAM:R.M. JOSHI, J.

¶15

RESERVED ON:JUNE 06, 2023 PRONOUNCED ON:JUNE 09, 2023

¶16

ORDER

¶17

1. Applicants are apprehending arrest in

¶18

connection with Crime No. 75/2023 registered with Udgir
City Police Station, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur for the
offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

Page 1 of 5

¶20

ABA-442-2023.odt

¶21

2.Ganpat Pawar, Joint District Registrar, Class
I gave report to the police about receiving direction
from Collector, Latur to lodge first information
report. It was found that in the year 2015-2016 the
work of data entry was assigned to M/s. Rudrani
Infotech and accordingly Applicants were working as the
Data Entry Operators in the office of Joint Sub-
Registrar, Class II, Udgir. In respect of the documents
registered during the said period, an inquiry was
conducted wherein it was found that the E-challans were
reused without defacing them and thereby cause loss to
the revenue of the State. It is alleged that the
present Applicants are responsible for the same.

¶22

3.Learned Counsel for the Applicants state that

¶23

the Applicants were entrusted only with the job of
effecting data entry and the Registrar was responsible
for the acceptance of registration. It is submitted
that there is nothing on record to show that it was the
duty of these Applicants to make sure that the challans
paid for the registration fee are defaced and that they
are not reused. It is also pointed out that the amount
of stamp duty, which was alleged loss to revenue of the

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

ABA-442-2023.odt

¶26

State, has already been deposited by the concerned
Registrar. It is further submitted that the Applicants
are still working in the said office and that their
custodial interrogation is not necessary.

¶27

4.Learned APP opposed the said submission by
referring to the investigation papers. According to
him, being the data entry operator initially it was the
responsibility of the Applicants to verify as to
whether the challans submitted along with document is
genuine and not reused. It was also their duty to
deface challans and since they have failed to discharge
their duty, there is reason to believe their
involvement in the crime in question. It is submitted
that having regard to the nature of offence, it is not
the fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶28

5.There is no dispute about the fact that the

¶29

present Applicants are working on contract basis only
for the purpose of effecting data entries in respect of
document brought of the registration. Prima facie there
is nothing on record to show that it was the
responsibility of these Applicants to verify the
document in question including the challans submitted

¶30

Page 3 of 5

¶31

ABA-442-2023.odt

¶32

along with it and to deface the challans so that the
same is not reused. As regards the investigation of the
crime is concerned, the entire record is available with
the office of Sub-registrar of Assurances, Udgir.
Nothing is to be recovered from the present Applicants
and hence, their custodial interrogation is not
necessary.

¶33

6.It is also informed to this Court that the

¶34

loss caused to revenue of State by way of reuse of
challans, has already been made good by the concerned
Registrar. Thus, it is not the case wherein any amount
is required to be recovered from the present
Applicants.

¶35

7.By passing interim order dated 30th March, 2023
the liberty of the Applicants was protected and they
were directed to appear before the Investigating
Officer as and when required for the purpose of
investigation. There is nothing to show that the said
liberty was misused by them. Having regard to the facts
and circumstances of the case and more particularly in
view of the fact that the custodial interrogation of
the Applicants is not necessary, it is a fit case to

¶36

Page 4 of 5

¶37

ABA-442-2023.odt

¶38

confirm the said order.

¶39

8. Accordingly, Application stands allowed by

¶40

confirming interim protection granted to the Applicants
vide order dated 30th March, 2023.

¶41

Malani

¶42

Page 5 of 5

Rajendra Namdeo Kamble and Another v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Namdeo Kamble and Another 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

Ashok Prabhakar Mitkar Vs Sumesh Sumatilal Katariya

Pravin Babasaheb Andhale Vs the Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar and Another

Dnyaneshwar Maruti Gawali and Others Vs the Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar and Another

Suraj Laxmanrao Dapke Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Mahalaxmi W/O. M. Suresh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ajit Bharat Biradar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another