Disposed

Prasad Vishwas Bhoir v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC1 Jul 2024ABA/1646/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought anticipatory bail in a cheating and depositor-protection case concerning an alleged Rs.25 lakh investment fraud by co-accused. The court found no prima facie connection between the applicant and the crime, noted co-accused were bailed and charge-sheeted, and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail: PR bond of Rs.25,000 with like sureties on arrest; attend police station as required; no tampering with evidence or influence on witnesses.

Prasad Vishwas Bhoir vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: 2024.09.21 02:51:09 +0530

¶2

Chitra Sonawane.

¶3

14-ABA-1646-2024.doc

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No.1646 of 2024

¶5

Prasad Vishwas Bhoir Age: 33 years, Occ: Business, Address: Resident Room 601/A, Mangal Garden, Sai Chowk, Barave, Khadakpada, Kalyan West, Thane – 421 301.

¶6

... Applicant

¶7

v/s.

¶8

State of Maharashtra At the instance of Senior Inspector of Police, Khadakpada Police Station, Through Public Prosecutor, Bombay High Court.

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

Mr Sunil Pandey, a/w. Mr Raju Mandal, i/b. Priyanshu Mishra, for the applicant.

¶11

Ms Supriya Kak, APP, for the respondent/ State.

¶12

Mr Jayendra Khairnar, for the Intervener.

¶13

PI Sandeep Shivale, Khadakpada Police Station, Thane City, is present.

¶14

Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 19 September 2024

¶15

P.C.:

¶16

This is an application for pre-arrest bail filed by the applicant, apprehending arrest in CR No.279 of 2023, registered at Khadakpada Police Station, Thane City, for offences punishable

Page 1 of 4

19 September 2024

Chitra Sonawane.

14-ABA-1646-2024.doc

under Sections 420 and 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.

¶22

According to the First Information Report (FIR), the coaccused, Pooja and Vishant, who operator under the business name M/s Sai Advisory and Investments, deceived the informant into investing a substantial amount of Rs.25 lakhs. They enticed the informant with a promise of a 10% return on the investment. However, they became evasive and did not fulfill their financial obligations.

¶23

Mr Sunil Pandey, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, asserts the applicant’s innocence. He argues that the applicant has been unjustly implicated in the ongoing conflict between the informant and the co-accused, merely because he facilitated their introduction. The applicant is not named in the FIR and has no financial interest in the transactions in question. The allegations primarily target the co-accused, who have already been granted bail, and a charge sheet has been filed against them. Mr Pandey emphasises that the investigation has concluded, and nothing remains to be recovered or discovered. The learned Counsel assures the Court that the applicant is ready to adhere to the imposed conditions.

Page 2 of 4

19 September 2024

Chitra Sonawane.

14-ABA-1646-2024.doc

Ms Supriya Kak, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State, along with Mr Jayendra Khairnar, the learned Counsel appearing for the Intervenor/ victim, jointly argue that the applicant conspired with the coaccused to defraud the informant and other investors. The applicant lured them to invest the amount into the firm by promising high returns. The learned APP submits that considering the seriousness of the offence, the applicant’s custody is deemed necessary. She expresses reservations about granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant as he may tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses.

¶29

After reviewing the records, it becomes evident that the informant’s grievance against the applicant primarily revolves around the fact that the applicant introduced the informant to the co-accused. Notably, the applicant is not named in the FIR, and the allegations are specifically directed towards the co-accused, who have already been released on bail. The applicant does not seem to be the beneficiary or recipient of the invested funds. Prima facie, nothing is on record to connect the applicant to the present crime. The alleged offence occurred between 2022 and 2023, and a charge sheet has already been filed against the coaccused, indicating that the investigation is nearing completion.

Page 3 of 4

19 September 2024

Chitra Sonawane.

14-ABA-1646-2024.doc

Furthermore, there appears to be no recovery or discovery made at the applicant’s behest. To address the prosecution’s concerns regarding evidence tampering and witness influence, appropriate conditions can be imposed. In this backdrop, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

(i) In the event of the applicant’s arrest in CR No.279 of 2023, registered at Khadakpada Police Station, Thane City, he shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶37

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required.

¶38

(iii) The applicant, himself or through any other person, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses.

¶39

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶40

(R.N. Laddha, J.)

¶41

Page 4 of 4

¶42

19 September 2024

Prasad Vishwas Bhoir v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasad Vishwas Bhoir 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mangesh Arunchandra Mourya vs the State of Maharashtra

Salman Irfan Bang vs State of Maharashtra

Salman Raza Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra

Mohammed Shahid Abdul Gafoor Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra

Vijay Patiram Yadav vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Omprakash Berlia vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.