Disposed

Bharat Govind Dhumal v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC8 Mar 2024ABA/631/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants sought anticipatory bail in a case alleging that office-bearers of a cooperative credit society sanctioned an irregular loan and used repaid cash to refund depositors. The court granted ad-interim pre-arrest bail on bonds of Rs.30,000 each, directed police-station attendance to cooperate with investigation, and called for the Investigating Officer's affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Ad-interim anticipatory bail on PR bond of Rs.30,000 each with sureties, operating till 30/04/2024, subject to attending police station as directed.

Bharat Govind Dhumal vs State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

12-ABA-622-2024.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 622 OF 2024

¶4

YUGANDHARA SHARAD PATIL

¶5

Digitally signed by YUGANDHARA SHARAD PATIL Date: 2024.04.01 11:29:08 +0530

¶6

Surekha Bharat Dhumal & Ors. .... Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent

¶7

WITH

¶8

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 631 OF 2024

¶9

Bharat Govind Dhumal .... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent

¶10

Mr. Balasaheb Deshmukh for the applicants in both ABAs. Mr. C.D. Mali, APP for the State/Respondent.

¶11

CORAM :SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 27^th MARCH, 2024

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

At the outset, learned counsel for the Applicants

¶14

submitted that the Applicant No. 3, Bharat Dhumal has filed separate Application inadvertently vide ABA No. 631 of 2024. Therefore, he seeks leave to delete name of Applicant No. 3 Bharat

¶15

Dhumal, from the cause title of the Application No. 622/2024.

¶16

Y.S.patil 1/ 5

¶17

12-ABA-622-2024.odt

¶18

Permission is granted. Amendment shall be carried out forthwith to remove Applicant No. 3 Bharat Dhumal from the cause title of ABA No. 622 of 2024.

¶19

In both these Applications a common order is passed because they arise out of same crime number.

¶20

The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No. 78 of 2023 registered at Yeola Police Station, Nashik, on 21/03/2024 under sections 406, 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

Heard Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Mali, learned APP for the State.

¶22

The FIR is lodged by one Suryakant Gangurde, who was auditor in respect of Dhanlaxmi Mahila Nagari Sahakari Sanstha Ltd., Yeola. He had conducted the audit between 26/11/2020 to 26/02/2021. The gist of the FIR is that the Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 in ABA No. 622 of 2024, are Chairman and Vice Chairman of the said society. They sanctioned loan of Rs. 2,60,00,000/- to the other Applicant Bharat Dhumal in ABA No.

¶23

Y.S.patil 2/ 5

¶24

12-ABA-622-2024.odt

¶25

631 of 2024. This amount was sanctioned in violation of the Rules and regulations. The Applicant Bharat repaid that loan in cash. The received cash was used in refunding the deposits of different depositors whose names are mentioned in the FIR. According to the informant, the Applicants have committed offences under Sections 406, 420 r/w 34 of the I.P.C.

¶26

Learned APP submitted that the Investigating Officer is not present in the Court today and therefore, he is not in a position to assist the Court in respect of the entire facts of this case. He seeks adjournment. Considering his request, today I have heard learned counsel for the Applicants for consideration of ad-interim relief.

¶27

Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the allegations in the FIR are not true. The Applicant Bharat Dhumal had mortgaged his property as security for the loan and after selling his land he has repaid that amount. There was no misappropriation either by the Bharat Dhumal or by other two Applicants. Even the FIR does not mention that there was

3/ 5

Y.S.patil

12-ABA-622-2024.odt

misappropriation of the amount which was given in cash by Bharat Dhumal.

¶32

Learned APP tried to submit that there was other misappropriation in respect of other investors. However, today he is not in a position to assist the Court properly. Therefore, it is necessary that the Investigating Officer files affidavit in reply to respond to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Applicant.

¶33

9. Considering these submissions, today the Applicants

¶34

can be protected by way of ad interim relief with directions to them to attend the concerned police station and to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the following order.

¶35

ORDER

¶36

(i) In the event of their arrest in connection with C.R.No. 78 of 2023 registered at Yeola Police Station, Nashik, , till the next date, the Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing P.R. bonda in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each (Rupees Thirty Thousand

¶37

Y.S.patil 4/ 5

¶38

12-ABA-622-2024.odt

¶39

Only) with one or two sureties each in the like amount.

¶40

(ii) This order shall operate till 30/04/2024.

¶41

(iii) The applicants shall attend the concerned Police Station from 15^th April 2024 to 18^th April 2024 between 1.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. and thereafter as and when called. The Applicants shall co-operate with the investigation.

¶42

(iv) The Investigating Officer shall file affidavit in reply with copy to the other side before the next date.

¶43

(v) Stand over to 30/ 04/2024.

¶44

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶45

Y.S.patil 5/ 5

Bharat Govind Dhumal v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Govind Dhumal v. 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

Alok Jagdish Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Chandrakant Marotirao Suryavanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Yuvraj Jambu Kamble Vs State of Maharashtra

Ganesh @Babaharimama Mahadev Khune Vs State of Maharashtra

Charisma Builders vs Minister of State (Revenue)

Viva Divine Ventures vs Madhu Jeevan Jyoti Co-Operative Housing Society Limited