Dismissed

Poonam Prathamesh Kudchadkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC23 Jul 2024ABA/1863/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought pre-arrest bail in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case involving Rs.20 lakhs invested on promises of returns; court found she received funds in her account, investigation ongoing with more victims emerging, and rejected the application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Poonam Prathamesh Kudchadkar vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: 2024.12.15 00:37:38 +0530

¶2

Chitra Sonawane.

¶3

10-aba-1863-2024.docx

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

Anticipatory Bail Application No.1863 of 2024

¶6

Poonam Prathamesh Kudchadkar Age 34 years, Occ. Service, R/at. Kailash Heights, B Wing, Room No.1004, 10th Floor, Global City, Agarwal Auto Stand, Virar (West), Maharashtra

¶7

… Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

The State of Maharashtra (At the instance of Vikhroli Police Station, vide C.R. No.367/2023) … Respondent

¶10

Ms Shraddha Vavhal, for the applicant. Mr M G Patil, APP, for the respondent/ State. PSI Khandare, Vikhroli Police Station, Mumbai, is present.

¶11

Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 13 December 2024.

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.367 of 2023, registered at Vikhroli Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Page 1 of 3

13 December 2024

Chitra Sonawane.

10-aba-1863-2024.docx

¶18

The prosecution alleges that the applicant, in collusion with the co-accused, persuaded the informant and her sister to invest a total of Rs.20 lakhs with promises of 10% returns. However, they did not repay the invested amount or provide the promised returns.

¶19

Ms Shraddha Vavhal, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, contends that the co-accused, the applicant’s husband, had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the informant promising the alleged returns on investment. The applicant was never a party to this agreement, and the alleged offence is of a civil nature. Emphasising the applicant’s innocence, the learned Counsel submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present crime, and nothing is to be recovered or discovered from her.

¶20

Mr MG Patil, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing respondent No.1 / State, submits that the offence is serious. The applicant and the co-accused lured the informant to invest Rs.20 lakhs by assuring substantial returns. Although the applicant is not a party to the agreement, the invested sums were deposited in her account. The investigation is ongoing, and more victims are coming forward. The

Page 2 of 3

13 December 2024

Chitra Sonawane.

10-aba-1863-2024.docx

¶25

applicant’s custody is necessary to unearth the fraud in all its aspects.

¶26

This Court has given anxious consideration to the rival submissions canvassed across the Bar and perused the records.

¶27

The allegations against the applicant revolve around persuading the informant and her sister to invest Rs.20 lakhs by promising lucrative returns. However, the applicant and the coaccused failed to return the alleged funds or the promised return. The records indicate that the applicant received the alleged invested funds in her bank account and benefited therefrom. Prima facie, the material on record suggests the applicant’s involvement in the crime. Furthermore, the investigation is ongoing, and additional similarly circumstanced victims have come forward. At this stage, granting the applicant pre-arrest bail may hinder the progress of an effective investigation. In the totality of the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. As a result, the application stands rejected.

¶28

Page 3 of 3

¶29

13 December 2024

Poonam Prathamesh Kudchadkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Poonam Prathamesh Kudchadkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vijay Nivrutti Rasal vs the State of Maharashtra

Wasim Salim Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra

Shital Santosh Jadhav vs the State of Maharashtra

Mustansir Ahemadali Angoothiwala vs Mohd. Suhail Yusuf Rindani

Ritali Vilas Koli @ Ritali Kaushal Girme vs Kaushal Kishor Girme

Prasad Vasant Kutarekar vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.