High Court of Bombay dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by Rahul Sharma, who faced charges of cheating under Sections 419 and 420 IPC. The court found he was implicated in a fraud involving Rs. 6.84 lakhs and rejected bail due to insufficient investigation progress.
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.
Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: 2024.09.13 01:20:01 Chitra Sonawane, +0530 10-aba-2271-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2271 of 2024 Rahul S/o. Giriraj Sharma Age 29 years, Occ. Job, R/o. 68, Jay Ambe So.,Part -2, Kuber Nagar,Ahmedabad, Gujarat. ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra (Copy to be served upon Ld. PP Office High Court, Bombay) ...Respondent
Mr Keshav Damani i/b Shraddha Kadam, for the Applicant. Ms Supriya Kak, APP for the Respondent/State. PI Bhosale, Pydhonie Police Station, Mumbai, is present.
Coram: R. N. Laddha, J. Date: 10 September 2024
P.C.
Heard Mr. Keshav Damani, the learned counsel for the applicant and Ms Supriya Kak, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent / State.
Page No. 1 of 3
10 September 2024.
Chitra Sonawane,
10-aba-2271-2024.doc
requested that the complainant make payments outside the company’s official channels, compromising significant tenders for a 1% commission. When the complainant declined due to insufficient funds, the applicant persisted for 10-15 days, pressuring him to comply. Eventually, the applicant revised his offer to Rs.20,000/-, which the complainant agreed to and paid online. However, the applicant delayed issuing a receipt and later introduced the complainant to a senior colleague, Jaywala. Jaywala informed the complainant that the applicant had been removed from the service and introduced a new executive, Pravin. Pravin demanded additional payments for government fees and an NISC certificate, assuring the complainant of securing government tenders along with 100% refund guarantee. Trusting these assurances, the complainant provided his bank details, expecting to receive a tender worth Rs.3,70,00,000/-. When the tender and payment did not materialise, the complainant filed an FIR after transferring a total sum of Rs.6,84,930/-.
Page No. 2 of 3
10 September 2024.
Chitra Sonawane,
10-aba-2271-2024.doc
performing his job duties. The amount of Rs.20,000/- was transferred to the company account, and the applicant subsequently left his job for personal reasons. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The learned Counsel also submits that the company opened an account in the applicant’s name without his involvement in the company affairs.
Page No. 3 of 3
10 September 2024.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail shall be granted to the applicant apprehending arrest in a cheating FIR.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rahul S/o. Giriraj Sharma
The State of Maharashtra
R. N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
