Arvindbhai Irshwarbhai Prajapati vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2025)

Arvindbhai Irshwarbhai Prajapati vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, who apprehends arrest in connection with C.R. No. 66/2019 registered with Mohadinagar Police Station, Dist. Dhule for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, should be granted anticipatory bail. +1 more

Court's answer

Prima facie there is material on record to indicate that the Applicant is connected with the crime; as a result, his custodial interrogation is necessary, and the anticipatory bail application stands dismissed.

Ratio / Principle

Although the charge-sheet has been filed, it is only against the co-accused; the applicant gives no explanation about the transaction of Rs. 1,40,00,000/- deposited by the co-accused in his account, the offence involves a huge amount and the money trail is required to be ascertained, warranting custodial interrogation despite filing of the charge-sheet.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (R. M. Joshi, J.) dismissed Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2205 of 2024 filed by Arvindbhai Irshwarbhai Prajapati, who apprehended arrest in C.R. No. 66/2019 of Mohadinagar Police Station, Dist. Dhule, for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468 read with Section 34 IPC. The FIR alleged misappropriation of a total sum of Rs. 4,86,60,000/- through loans obtained without security and bogus transfer letters (BTL) and cash deposit certificates. Though the applicant was not named in the FIR and the charge-sheet had been filed (only against the co-accused), the Court found prima facie material connecting the applicant with the crime: the charge-sheet indicated that Rs. 1,40,00,000/- was deposited by the co-accused in the applicant's account, for which the applicant gave no explanation; the offence involved a huge amount and the money trail was required to be ascertained. Holding the applicant's custodial interrogation necessary, the Court dismissed the application.

2025:BHC-AUG:2567

941-ABA-2205-2024.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2205 OF 2024

Arvindbhai Irshwarbhai Prajapati VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra And Another

Mr. Swapnil Patnunkar i/by J. P. Legal Asso, Advocate for the Applicant

Mrs. M. N. Ghanekar, APP for the Respondent/State

Mr S . U. Chaudhari, Advocate for the Informant *******

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J DATE : JANUARY 29, 2025

PER COURT :

Mr. S. U. Chaudhari, learned Counsel, seeks

leave to assist APP on behalf of Informant.

Having regard to the nature of offence, he is permitted to assist APP.

Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with

with C.R. No. 66/2019 registered with Mohadinagar Police Station, Dist. Dhule for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The first information report lodged by the Informant alleged the act of misappropriation, fraud,

Umesh PAGE 1 OF 3

941-ABA-2205-2024.odt

etc against the accused persons. It is the case of the Informant that Accused No. 1 in collusion with Accused

No. 3 has obtained loan without submitting any security. There is also allegation that the accused has called upon the Informant to deposit money into the different accounts and bogus transfer letter (BTL) and cash deposit certificates were prepared and given to the Informant. There is allegation that total sum of Rs. 4,86,60,000/- is misappropriated.

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the name of the Applicant is not referred in the FIR. It is his further submission that the charge-sheet has

been filed in the instant case and as such, the custodial interrogation of the Applicant is not necessary. It is his further submission that the amount came to be deposited in his account is at the instance of his son-in-law.

Learned APP and learned Counsel for Informant opposed the application. It is pointed out by learned

APP that though Applicant is not named in the FIR,

account number is mentioned which pertains to the Applicant.

PAGE 2 OF 3

Umesh

941-ABA-2205-2024.odt

There is no dispute about the fact that the

charge-sheet has been filed, however, same has been filed against the co-accused. In the instant case, there is allegation of misappropriation of funds. Charge-sheet further indicates that the amount of Rs. 1,40,00,000/- is deposited by the co-accused in the

account of present Applicant. Applicant gives no explanation about the said transaction. The offence involves huge amount. The money trail is required to be ascertained. Prima facie there is material on record to indicate that the Applicant is connected with the crime. As a result of this, his custodial interrogation is necessary. Hence, application stands dismissed.

PAGE 3 OF 3

Umesh