Disposed

Vijay Lalsingh Thakur and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Jun 2024ABA/1219/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two anticipatory bail applications concerning a sale deed executed by impersonation of the original owner were decided. Applicants in one application had become witnesses after the charge-sheet, so that application was disposed of. The other applicant's interim bail order was confirmed as he had promptly reported the fraud and cooperated.

What did the court decide?

Interim order dated 24 July 2024 made absolute; ABA 1977/2024 allowed; ABA 1219/2024 disposed of as applicants no longer arraigned as accused.

Vijay Lalsingh Thakur and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

bipin prithiani

¶2

¶3

8-aba-1977.24 & anr.doc

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1977 OF 2024

¶6

… Goradhan Pahilraj Hemrajani Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶7

WITH

¶8

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1219 OF 2024

¶9

Vijay Lalsingh Thakur … 2. Manoj Tirathdas Lalwani Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶10

¶11

Mr. Arjun Jeswani for the Applicant in ABA/1977/2024. Mr. Arjun S. Pawar for Applicant in ABA/1219/2024. Mr. Tanveer Khan, APP for Respondent-State.

¶12

Mr. Sagar Argade, PSI, Lonavala Rural Police Station.

¶13

¶14

CORAM: MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : 9^th DECEMBER 2024

¶15

P.C. :

¶16

BIPINDHARMENDERPRITHIANI Digitally signed by BIPINDHARMENDER PRITHIANIDate: 2024.12.09 18:15:38+0530

¶17

. In these applications, interim orders having been operating in favour of the applicants. In Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1219 of 2024, interim order was passed in favour of the applicants on 2^nd May 2024 and in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1977 of 2024, interim order was passed in favour of the applicant on 24^th July 2024.

¶18

The applicants appear to have abided by the directions

¶19

bipin prithiani

¶20

¶21

8-aba-1977.24 & anr.doc

¶22

issued by this Court, while granting interim relief in their favour.

¶23

As regards Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1219 of 2024, it is brought to the notice of this Court that both the applicants are no longer arraigned as accused persons and they are cited as witnesses, upon filing of charge-sheet.

¶24

Hence, no further orders are necessary in this application and it is accordingly disposed of.

¶25

As regards Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1977 of 2024, in the order dated 24^th July 2024 passed by this Court (Coram: Sarang V. Kotwal, J.) it was recorded that the fact that the role ascribed to the applicant was identical to that alleged against the applicants in the accompanying application.

¶26

Today, when this application was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the applicant relied upon Exhibits ‘G’ and ‘H’, being complaints submitted by the applicant before the Police on 20^th November 2023 and 15^th December 2023, stating that after the subject document i.e. sale deed was registered on 22^nd June 2023, the applicant came to know that the person who had signed and executed the document as the vendor, had impersonated the original owner and that the applicant and the other purchasers had been duped.

¶27

By placing reliance on the aforesaid complaints, it is submitted that since the applicant himself had taken immediate

¶28

¶29

bipin prithiani

¶30

8-aba-1977.24 & anr.doc

¶31

steps with regard to the aforesaid sale deed being executed by a person, who had impersonated the original owner, the bonafide of the applicant is absolutely clear. It is submitted that the FIR is registered much later i.e. on 15^th March 2024. It is further submitted that the payments that were to be made through cheques under the said document, were stopped by way of giving Stop Payment instructions, when the fraud came to light. It was further submitted that since the applicant has cooperated with the investigation, this Court may consider allowing the application.

¶32

On the other hand, the learned APP submitted that investigation has revealed an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- found its way to the applicant, thereby he could be termed as a beneficiary under the fraudulent transaction. In response to the same, it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the said amount was transferred by the co-accused (broker) to the applicant in connection with an independent transaction and an explanation in that regard can be placed before this Court. It was emphasized that the said aspect of the matter came to light in the charge-sheet.

¶33

This Court is of the opinion that the applicant himself having submitted complaints in November and December 2023 with regard to the fraudulent transaction and the FIR being registered much later on 15^th March 2024, is a factor that cannot be ignored. A semblance of explanation sought to be given with regard to the aforesaid amount of Rs.4,50,000/- and considering the fact that the applicant has cooperated with the investigation,

¶34

bipin prithiani

¶35

¶36

8-aba-1977.24 & anr.doc

¶37

this Court is inclined to confirm the interim order and allow the present application.

¶38

In view of the above, the interim order dated 24^th July 2024 is made absolute and the application is allowed.

¶39

MANISH PITALE, J.

Vijay Lalsingh Thakur and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Lalsingh Thakur 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Laser Shaving India Private Limited vs Rkrm International Products Private Limited

Hritik Baban Pawar vs State of Maharashtra

Ali Ayyakannu Shaikh@Murty vs State of Maharashtra

Ramzan Kamruddin Shaikh @ Dabbu vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Ganpat Bhapkar vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Kiran Shankar Minchekar vs the State of Maharashtra