Allowed

Suraj Shyamal Das v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC29 Mar 2023BA/31/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay held that the applicant was a fit case for release on bail. The court noted there was no prima facie material to implicate the applicant in specific serious offences and accepted that certain charges were permitted to be compounded.

What did the court decide?

Allowed the bail application on the condition of furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties and providing an address undertaking.

Suraj Shyamal Das Vs the State of Maharashtra — Money Laundering | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

Megha

¶2

39_ba_31_2023 spk.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.31 OF 2023

¶5

Suraj Shyamal Das...Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra...Respondent

¶8

Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde with Mr. Changdev S. Shingade for the Applicant.
Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for Respondent -State.

¶9

CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : 29^th MARCH, 2023.

¶10

P. C. :-

¶11

1. At the outset learned counsel for the Applicant seeks leave

¶12

to amend the prayer clause as to incorporate the case details. Leave is
granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

¶13

2. This is an application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. filed

¶14

by the Applicant, who is facing trial in R.C.C. No.1174 of 2022,
pending on the file of learned J.M.F.C., Solapur. Said case arises from
C.R. No.374 of 2021 registered with Vijapur Naka Police Station,
Solapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 419, 420, 465,
467, 468, 471 and 120-B r/w 34 of the IPC and Sections 66(c) and

¶15

66(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶16

1/4

¶17

Megha 39_ba_31_2023 spk.doc

¶18

3.Heard Mr. Ritesh Thobde, learned counsel for the Applicant
and Mr. S.V. Gavand, learned APP for the Respondent -State. I have
perused the records and considered the submissions advanced by the
learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶19

4.The case of the prosecution is that the co-accused had
induced the first informant -Bhausaheb Kashinath Dhumal in paying an
amount around Rs.1 crore by falsely representing that they would issue
insurance policy for the said amount.

¶20

5.The records reveal that the only allegation against the
Applicant is that he had allowed accused No.26 to use his bank account
in the Punjab National Bank to collect an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from

¶21

the victim. Apart from this, there is no other prima facie material to
show his involvement in cheating the Complainant and /or fabricating
any records.

¶22

6.Learned counsel for the Applicant states that the Applicant
has already paid to the Complainant an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- by
Demand Draft and that the Applicant had filed an application before
the Trial Court to compound the offence. The Complainant had also

¶23

2/4

¶24

Megha 39_ba_31_2023 spk.doc

¶25

given no objection to compound the offence. Learned counsel for the
Applicant has also placed on record copy of the order dated
10/03/2023, which reveals that the learned Magistrate has permitted
the parties to compound the offences punishable under Sections 406,
419 and 420 of the IPC.

¶26

7.There is no prima facie material to indicate that the
Applicant is involved in committing offences punishable under Sections
465, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC. The Applicant is in custody since
June-2022. There is no possibility of the trial concluding in immediate
future. Considering the above facts and circumstances and particularly,
the role attributed to the Applicant, in my considered view this is a fit
case to exercise discretion under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. Hence, the

¶27

application is allowed on the following terms and conditions:-

¶28

(i) The Applicant, who is arrested in C.R. No.374 of

¶29

2021 registered with Vijapur Naka Police Station,

¶30

Solapur, he shall be released on bail on furnishing

¶31

PR bonds in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or
two sureties to the like amount;

¶32

(ii) The Applicant shall appear before the Trial Court

¶33

on each and every date of hearing;

¶34

3/4

¶35

Megha 39_ba_31_2023 spk.doc

¶36

(iii) The Applicant shall keep the Trial Court informed

¶37

of his current address and mobile contact number

¶38

and/or change of residence or mobile details, if

¶39

any, from time to time.

¶40

8. The application stands disposed of.

¶41

 (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

¶42

Digitally signed MEGHA by MEGHA SPARAB S Date: 2023.04.19 PARAB 17:19:18 +0530

¶43

4/4

Suraj Shyamal Das v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Shyamal Das 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

Mangal Bhimrao Talekar and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra

Ashok Kedarmal Sharma Vs State of Maharashtra

Umesh Narayan Dhanurkar Vs State of Maharashtra

Mohabbatali Anwarali Khan @ Chinku Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sachin Kantilal Bhatt and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra

Afzal Choudhary and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra