In an anticipatory bail application, the court dismissed the plea after noting documentary evidence of money transfer into the applicant's account. The court held that custodial interrogation was necessary as the applicant failed to explain the transactions.
Anticipatory bail application dismissed; custody granted pending investigation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
940-ABA-1380-2024.odt
2024:BHC-AUG:25286
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1380 OF 2024
Madhav Subhash Ogale
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
Mr. S. S. Deshmukh h/f Mr. N. B. Khandare, Advocate for the ApplicantMr. P. K. Lakhotiya, APP for the Respondent/State *******CORAM:R.M. JOSHI, J
DATE:OCTOBER 15, 2024
PER COURT :
1. Applicant apprehends arrest in connection
with Crime No. 401/2024 registered with Vivekanand
Chowk Police Station, Dist. Latur for the offences
punishable under Sections 471, 468, 467, 420 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2.First informant claims that his acquaintance
Subhash i.e., father of the present Applicant had told
him that the Applicant has joined the government
service as Talathi. He further told him that if he
wants his daughter-in-law to be get into government
employment, he will have to spend Rs. 15 lacs. Believing him, a sum of Rs. 7 lacs was paid out of Rs. 15 lacs was paid on 22.07.2022 at MIT College wherein father of the Applicant is working. It is stated that Umesh PAGE 1 OF 3
940-ABA-1380-2024.odt
an appointment order was handed over to the informant,
however, later on it was revealed that it was not a
genuine appointment order. However, in the meantime, as
people came to know about the daughter-in-law of the
informant getting government employment, some of them
who are named in the FIR approached through the
informant to the accused. It is alleged that the
Applicant and his father collected Rs. 15 lacs each
from all of them on assurance of giving government
employment, which was never fructified.
3.Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that
tenor of the FIR indicates that it is the father of the
Applicant who seems to have assured the employment to
the daughter-in-law of the Informant and not present
Applicant. It is his submission that Applicant is
medical representative and hence, question of he posing
himself Talathi does not arise. It is his further
submission that there are allegations against co-
accused Rajratan Suryawanshi and it speaks also about
transfer of money in the bank account at his instance.
4. Learned APP opposed the Application. It is his contention that not only there are statements of Umesh PAGE 2 OF 3
940-ABA-1380-2024.odt
witnesses which indicate that the Applicant was also
present along with his father at the time of assuring
Informant and others for government employment, but
there are transfers of the amounts in the account of
the present Applicant. He has drawn attention of the
Court to one of such bank transfer of Rs. 7 lacs
transferred between 19.03.2024 – 18.04.2024 into the
account of present Applicant bearing no. 04971040031403
of IDBI Bank.
5.This is not the case wherein there are only
statements of witnesses which sought to implicate the
Applicant in this crime. There is documentary evidence
on record in the form of Rs. 7 lacs transferred into
the aforestated account of the Applicant from victim.
During the course of hearing, an explanation was sought
from the Applicant in this regard. No explanation is
forthcoming from the Applicant. This evidence is more
than sufficient to hold that he is party to the crime
in question. As such, his custodial interrogation is
necessary. In the result, application stands dismissed.
PAGE 3 OF 3
Umesh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted where documentary evidence of monetary transfer implicates the applicant.
Whether custodial interrogation is necessary given the lack of explanation from the applicant regarding fund transfers.
Madhav Subhash Ogale
The State Of Maharashtra
R.M. JOSHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court