In a bail application, legal heirs prayed for refund of a Rs.20 lakh deposit made by the original accused. The court rejected the plea, ruling the funds were a security for the complainant, not a refundable bail bond.
Application for refund of security deposit rejected.
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.
2024:BHC-NAG:9126
1
06.appln.1211.24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1211 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.808 OF 2024 IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.364 OF 2022
(Smt. Vimladevi Premsukhdas Rathi and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order
Mr. A.D. Bhate, Advocate for the applicants. Ms S. Dhote, APP for the State.
Mr. A. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for intervenor.
CORAM:- URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J. DATED :- AUGUST 14, 2024
Heard.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.808 OF 2024
By this application, the legal heirs of the original accused namely Pradipkumar Premsukhdas Rathi
2
06.appln.1211.24.odt
are seeking refund of the amount deposited as one of the conditions of bail. It is contended that on the basis of complaint lodged by the complainant Smt. Anju Lovekesh Soni resident of Khamgaon and crime was registered against the original accused under Sections 255, 260, 420, 423, 465, 468, 471, 472 and 475 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 65D of the IT Act vide Crime No.46 of 2021. During the investigation, the original accused has filed an application for grant of bail. As per the allegations against the original accused that he was involved in a forgery of the documents and thereby the complainant was duped. The original accused has shown his readiness to deposit Rs.20,00,000/- to show his bonafides and accordingly he has deposited the same.
3
06.appln.1211.24.odt
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
*Divya
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail deposit amount, characterized by the court as a security for the complainant's interest rather than a standard bail condition, should be refunded to the accused's legal heirs.
Whether the abatement of proceedings against the original accused entitles the legal heirs to withdraw the security deposit.
Pradipkumar Premsukhdas Rathi and ors.
State of Maharashtra
URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
