Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.G.Sewlikar, J.
Shaileshkumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Bail Application No. 1435 of 2021, 1698 of 2021
Decided On : 15-03-2022
G.K.Naik, Advocate, G.O.Wattamwar, Advocate, S.S.Gangakhedkar, Advocate
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for substantial evidence to justify denial of bail, especially when the offences are triable by a Magistrate and the accused have been in custody for a significant period.
Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Offences - Ss. 420, 463, 464, 468, 471, 473, 120-B, 201 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code
Fact of the Case:
The applicants were seeking bail in connection with an offence involving cheating individuals by promising government jobs in the Railway Department and taking large sums of money from them. The investigation revealed a network of individuals involved in the racket.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence against the applicants was not substantial, and the witnesses' statements did not directly implicate the applicants in receiving the fraudulent payments. The court also noted that the applicants had been in custody for a significant period and that the offences were triable by a Magistrate.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the evidence linking the applicants to the fraudulent activities, the delay in lodging the First Information Report, and the nature of the job offers made to the victims.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the lack of direct evidence implicating the applicants, the delay in filing the report, and the nature of the job offers made to the victims in reaching its decision to grant bail.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to both applicants with stringent conditions, considering the lack of substantial evidence against them and the fact that the offences were triable by a Magistrate.
JUDGMENT
1. Both these applications are disposed of by common order as they arise out of the same offence.
2. Both these applicants have fled these applications under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on bail in connection with Crime No. 0153/2021 registered with Vasmat City Police Station, Dist. Hingoli, for the offences punishable under Ss. 420, 463, 464, 468, 471, 473, 120-B, 201 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Facts leading to these applications in nutshell are that one Akshay Kishor Mahajan is the friend of the informant by the name of Pandit Sudhakar Dhavale. Through Akshay Mahajan, the informant got acquainted with Santosh Banwarilal. The said Santosh Banwarilal misrepresented the informant that he would help the unemployed people in getting employment in Government sector i.e. Railway Department. Therefore, on 19/7/2018, informant paid Rs.1,50,000.00 to Santosh Banwarilal. Again on 21/9/2018, the informant paid Rs.40,000.00 to Santosh Banwarilal for the same cause. Again on 26/9/2018, he paid Rs.1,00,000.00 to Santosh Banwarilal. Informant again paid Rs.30,000.00 to said Santosh Banwarilal on 20/11/2018 and 31/7/2019. In this manner, he paid Rs.3,50,000.00 to Santosh Banwarilal. The informant kept on asking said Santosh Banwarilal as to when the informant would get the call letter. Said Sntosh Banwarilal demanded Rs.5,00,000.00 for being paid to the offcer and Rs.1,50,000.00 to be paid to the clerk and stated that the informant would get the letter of appointment within eight days. Informant paid this amount to Santosh Banwarilal in the presence of Shubham Manoj Shewate and Dinesh Vainath Parswale. Informant again called up Santosh Banwarilal. He told the informant that the offcer had gone on leave for eight days. Thereafter, he waited for eight days and again called up said Santosh Banwarilal but his phone was switched off. Thereafter, he realised that he was cheated by Santosh Banwarilal. Accordingly, he lodged report in the police station.
4. Investigation was taken up. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. During investigation, it transpired that one Ravindra Dayanidhi Shankhuwa and Narendra Vishnudev Prasad were also involved in this racket of deceiving the people by inducing them to pay money on the assurance of giving employment in Government sector. During the interrogation of Ravindra Shankhuwa, the name of Gautam Eknath Fanase, applicant in Bail Application No. 1698/2021 was disclosed. During investigation, the name of one Abhay Meghashyam Redkar was also disclosed. In the interrogation of Abhya Meghashyam Redkar, name of Shaileshkumar Narbada Dube, applicant in Bail Application No. 1435/2021 came to be disclosed.
5. Heard Shri Gangakhedkar, learned counsel for the applicant in Bail Application No. 1485/2021, Shri Naik Thigle, learned counsel for the applicant in Bail Application No. 1698/2021 and Shri Wattamwar, learned APP for the State.
6. Learned counsel Shri Gangakhedkar submitted that the name of the applicant Shaileshkumar Dube does not appear in the First Information Report. The First Information Report is lodged after an inordinate delay of two years. According to the informant, the alleged payment was made on 19/7/2018, whereas First Information Report came to be lodged on 13/5/2021. He further submitted that the name of applicant Shaileshkumar Dube came to be disclosed during interrogation of accused Santoshkumar Saroj also called as Pandy. However, the same cannot be used against the applicant in view of provisions of Sec. 25 and 27 of the Evidence Act. There is no recovery from the applicant. No witness states that any amount was paid to the applicant by any of the witnesses. He further submitted that statement of one Anita Ishwarlal Sonawane shows that she had paid Rs.2,00,000.00 to accused No. 7 Abhay Redkar. Accused No. 7 introduced applicant Shaileshkumar Dube to Anita Sonawane. At the instance of accused No. 7, an amount of Rs.2,60,000.00 was tr
