Rupak Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Additional Commissioner and Others

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no iota of evidence to infer that the amount to the extent of Rs.10,500/- received in the account of petitioner was received from any illegal source, however, so as to demonstrate his bonafide, he would claim that he shall forthwith deposit an amount of Rs.10,500/with the Investigating Officer without prejudice to his rights and contentions, not only in the present petition, but, also in case if he is required to face the prosecution on merits. According to him, he is depositing the said amount with an intention to make the account mentioned in prayer clause [a] operational, which is necessary for his day to day affairs.

¶29

To substantiate his aforesaid contention, support is drawn from the Division Bench judgment of this Court in case of Ishwar Marotrao Kumbhare .vrs. State of Maharashtra and another reported at 2022 [6] Mh.L.J.(Cri) 631. He would claim that freezing of the account of the petitioner to the extent of entire

¶30

Rgd

Order

2503cwp72.25.odt

3

amount of cash involved in the offence in question is of Rs.20 lakhs and odd, which cannot be sustained.

¶35

As against this, Shri Ghodeswar, the learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner has cooperated in the investigation, however, he was unable to answer the issue as regards the source of amount of Rs.10,500/- which was received in one of his bank account. According to the learned A.P.P., once the amount of Rs.10,500/- is secured, the bank account of the petitioner can be defreezed. However, Shri Ghodeswar, the learned A.P.P. would claim that in case if in future some additional amount is found to be received in the account of the petitioner, a written notice/intimation of the same shall be served on the petitioner before ordering freezing of the account.

¶36

In this background, we deem it appropriate to allow the present petition, thereby directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.10,500/- with the Investigating Officer voluntarily and we accept the statement made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner to that effect as an undertaking to the Court. In that view of the matter and keeping right of the respondents reserved, as

Rgd

Order

2503cwp72.25.odt

4

claimed by the learned A.P.P. stated herein above, we direct defreezing of the account of petitioner as mentioned in prayer clause [a]. 7. Criminal Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶42

(MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J)

¶43

Rgd

Rupak Singh v. the State of Maharashtra through the Additional Commissioner and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupak Singh v. the State of Maharashtra through the Additional Commissioner and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashish Vinaykrao Kanherkar Vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso. Ps. Anjangaonruji, Dist. Amravati

Amol S/O Uttam Wankar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Education and Sports Department, Mumbai and Others

Mahatma Fule Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, through Its Secretary, vs Shri. Shivaji Education Society, through Its Secretary, Amravati and Another

Vaishnavi Chandrashekhar Chellirwar Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary for Public Health Dept., Mumbai and Anr.

Manjeet Singh S/O Dilip Singh Gulati Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Road and Transport Department, Mumbai and Others

Sudhakar Bhaurao Wayal and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary for Urban Development Dept., Mumbai and Others