Allowed

Justin Thadathil Varghese v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Feb 2024BA/1978/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed. The single judge inclined to release the applicant on bail for cheating and related financial offences, granting liberty upon furnishing a bond with sureties and adhering to specified reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000 with sureties, monthly station attendance, and no travel abroad without court permission.

Justin Thadathil Varghese Vs State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

4-ba-1978-23.doc

¶2

Digitally signed by DINESH DINESH SADANAND SADANAND SHERLA SHERLA Date: 2024.02.08 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 17:10:45 +0500 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1978 OF 2023

¶3

Justin T. Varghese ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶4

Mr. Shripad P. Hushing for the Applicant. Ms Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent.

¶5

CORAM : N. R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 3 FEBRUARY 2024.

¶6

PC:-

¶7

This is an application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail.

¶8

The applicant came to be arrested in C.R. No.273 of 2019 registered at Koregaon Park Police Station, Pune for the ofences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 409 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 & 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, 1999 (M.P.I.D. Act) and Sections 3, 4, 5 read with 21 and 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Depository Scheme Act, 2019.

¶9

According to the prosecution, the applicant, who was working as Branch Manager in Goodwin Jewelers, and other coaccused had induced the complainant and other investors to invest money in their investment schemes. The allegations against the present applicant and other co-accused are of duping the investors to the tune of Rs.3,04,43,880/-.

¶10

1/3

¶11

Dinesh S. Sherla

¶12

4-ba-1978-23.doc

¶13

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent- State.

¶14

It appears that after registration of crime, the forensic audit was conducted. According to the prosecution, during the said forensic audit the bank account of the applicant was examined and in addition to his salary about Rs.24 lakhs were found to be deposited in his account. I have perused the said audit report. Out of the said amount of Rs.24 lakhs, amount of Rs.14,15,462/- was deposited in the bank account of present applicant through IMPS/NEFT. According to the prosecution, the said amount was deposited by the investors in the bank account of the applicant. However, there are no statements of investors to that efect.

¶15

The applicant is in jail for about 13 months. Considering overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail on certain conditions. In the result, the following order is passed.

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

(i) The Application is allowed.

¶18

(ii) The applicant be released on bail in C.R.No.273 of 2019 registered at Koregaon Park Police Station, Pune for the ofences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 409 read with 34 of the I.P.C., Sections 3 & 4 of the M.P.I.D. Act and Sections 3, 4, 5 read with 21 and 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Depository Scheme Act,

¶19

2/3

¶20

Dinesh S. Sherla

¶21

4-ba-1978-23.doc

¶22

2019 on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand ) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station once in a month, i.e., on frst Saturday between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial.

¶24

(iv) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

¶25

(N.R. BORKAR, J.)

¶26

3/3

¶27

Dinesh S. Sherla

Justin Thadathil Varghese v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Justin Thadathil Varghese 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

Similar cases

M/S. Ambika Land Developers Nagpur Thr. Partner, Geeta Namdeorao Dhandale vs Rajpal S/O Laxman Raut and Another

Jitendra S/O Kisan Rathod vs Shekar Rambhau Kanoje and Another

Sharafat Husain S/O Taj Mohammad vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Ministry of Home Affairs, Mumbai and Another

Gangaram Namdev Khande Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suresh Bhaurao Shivale Vs State of Maharashtra

Tejaskumar @ Yalappa Gundappa Salunkhe @ Bhat Vs State of Maharashtra