Allowed

Harshad Maruti Dhumal v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC13 Nov 2024ABA/3055/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought anticipatory bail in a cheating case alleging fraudulent sale of the informant's BPCL shares worth about Rs.13 lakhs. The applicant deposited Rs.9 lakhs to show bona fides; investigation was nearly complete and the prosecution did not object. Bail granted on conditions including attendance at the police station.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail: release on PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or more like sureties if arrested; applicant to attend police station as required and not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.

Harshad Maruti Dhumal vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: Chitra Sonawane. 14-ABA-3055-2024.docx2024.11.30 02:38:21 +0530

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3055 of 2024

¶3

Harshad Maruti Dhumal Aged 28 years, being the applicant above named, present residing at 211, 2^nd Floor, E- Wing, Meter Room No.2, Parijat SRA Co. Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd, Jerbai Wadia Road, Opp. India Cancer Society, Parel Bhoiwada, Mumbai – 400 012.

¶4

...Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra Summons to be served through Public Prosecutor Criminal Appellate Side, High Court, Mumbai.

¶7

The Senior Inspector of Police, Kalachowki Police Station, Veer Shrikant Hadkar Marg, Kalachowki, Near Cotton Green Railway Station West, Mumbai – 400 033. ...Respondents

¶8

Ms Sofia Shaikh i/b Mr Mohd. Ahmed Shaikh, for the applicant.

¶9

Mr Yogesh Y Dabke, APP for the respondents/ State. PI Jadhav, Kalachowki Police Station, Mumbai, is present.

Page 1 of 4

29 November 2024

Chitra Sonawane.

14-ABA-3055-2024.docx

¶14

Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 29 November 2024

¶15

P.C.:

¶16

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.155 of 2024, registered at Kalachowki Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶17

The prosecution alleges that the applicant fraudulently misappropriated 4000 shares of BPCL belonging to the informant, valued at Rs.13 lakhs, without authorisation.

¶18

Ms Sofia Shaikh, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, contends that the shares in question were sold through SMIFS Limited’s mobile trading application with the informant’s confirmation. The learned Counsel submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. Furthermore, she contends that at the relevant time, the shares were valued at Rs.9 lakhs and not Rs.13 lakhs. To demonstrate his bona fides, the applicant has voluntarily deposited the said amount with the registry of this Court and expressed his willingness to

¶19

Page 2 of 4

¶20

29 November 2024

¶21

Chitra Sonawane. 14-ABA-3055-2024.docx

¶22

comply with any conditions set by this Court.

¶23

Mr Yogesh Dabke, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondents/ State, confirms that the applicant has deposited Rs.9 lakhs before this Court. Based on instructions from the investigating officer, the learned APP acknowledges that the applicant has been cooperating throughout the investigation and has regularly attended police station as required. The learned APP further concedes that the investigation is at the verge of completion and, the prosecution does not object to granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant, provided he continues to cooperate and attend the police station as and when required.

¶24

From a perusal of the records, it appears that the applicant stands accused of selling the informant’s BPCL shares, which were reported received as a part of the retirement benefit, without proper authorisation. The applicant has no criminal antecedents, and his deposit of Rs.9 lakhs reflects an effort to demonstrate good faith. Additionally, the investigating officer has confirmed that the investigation is nearing completion and that custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. The applicant has also shown his readiness to comply with conditions imposed by the Court. In these

¶25

Page 3 of 4

¶26

29 November 2024

¶27

Chitra Sonawane. 14-ABA-3055-2024.docx

¶28

circumstances, the application is allowed in the following terms:

¶29

(i) In the event of the applicant’s arrest in connection with CR No.155 of 2024, registered at Kalachowki Police Station, Mumbai, 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.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶33

Page 4 of 4

¶34

29 November 2024

Harshad Maruti Dhumal v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harshad Maruti Dhumal v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Madanlal Balmukund Karwa and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Badal Maliram Mittal vs the State of Maharashtra

Sanket Sunil Nagine vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

State of Maharashtra vs Ramesh Madhukar Modak @ Shivkrupanand Swamiji

Manisha Ramnath Narale vs Sampatti Arjun Narale

Purab Bharat Rajwani and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra