SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
SAKET S/O. LALITKUMAR LOHIA THR. P.O.A. SHRI. LALITKUMAR S/O. LATE NANDKISHORE LOHIA AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. LAKADGANJ POLICE STATION NAGPUR – Respondent
ABA 489/2018



Advocates:
['SHYAM DAYARAM DEWANI', 'DIPENN S JAGYASIDIPENN S JAGYASI', 'R S DEWANI', 'SAHIL S DEWANI', 'DIPENN S JAGYASI', 'APP']

aba486.18+.O.odt 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.486 OF 2018

(Rajkumar Hanumanprasad Saboo Vs. State of Maharashtra thr. PSO PS Lakadganj,

Nagpur)

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.487 OF 2018

(Suhasini w/o Lalitkumar Lohai Vs. State of Maharashtra thr. PSO PS Lakadganj,

Nagpur)

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.488 OF 2018

(Lalitkumar s/o Late Nandkishore Lohia Vs. State of Maharashtra thr. PSO PS

Lakadganj, Nagpur)

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.489 OF 2018

(Saket s/o Lalitkumar Lohia and another Vs. State of Maharashtra thr. PSO PS

Lakadganj, Nagpur)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,

appearances, Court's orders of directions

Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar’s Orders.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shri Shyam Dewani, Advocate for Applicant.

Shri N.B. Jawade, APP for Non-Applicant/State.

CORAM: ROHIT B. DEO, J.

DATE OF RESERVING THE ORDER:

27.07.2018

DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER:

31.07.2018

These applications under section 438 of the

Criminal Procedure Code (Code) are moved by the

applicants who are apprehending arrest in Crime 131/2017

registered with the Lakadganj Police Station Nagpur for

offence punishable under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471

read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2]

The complainant Laxmikant Deviduttji Murarka

has moved an application seeking permission to assist the

prosecution. The said application is allowed.

aba486.18+.O.odt 2

3]

The substratum of the prosecution case is that

the original commencement certificate – building permit

signed

by

the

Town

Planner

is

permit

16-A/BP/Nagpur/TP/NMC/10 dated 30.04.2012. A forged

and/or fraudulent document is created and the building

permit is shown as 116-A/BP/Nagpur/TP/NMC/10 dated

30.03.2012. The underlying object, presumably is to claim

some benefits under the income tax law by representing

that the commencement certificate – building permit in

respect of apartment scheme “Garden Enclave” which is a

project of the “Suhasini Realty” of which Smt. Suhasini

Lohia, applicant in Criminal Application (ABA) 487/2018 is

the owner, was issued in the financial year 2012-2013.

4]

The applicants assert, and there is no demur,

that although the project is situated within the jurisdiction

of the Ganeshpeth Police Station, a disgruntled purchaser of

an apartment Mr. Laxmikant Murarka lodged complaint

dated 11.12.2015 with the Lakadganj Police Station.

The gist of the complaint is that benefits under the income

tax act were availed by creating a forged or fabricated

document to show that the commencement certificate –

building permit was issued on 30.03.2012. Be it noted, that

it is not disputed that the commencement certificate dated

30.04.2012 is duly issued. The complaint lodged by

Mr. Laxmikant Murarka, which is the basis of the

investigation, is that the date 30.04.2012 is fraudulently

shown as 30.03.2012 to claim income tax benefit.

aba486.18+.O.odt 3

5]

A few uncontroverted facts may now be noted.

The offence is allegedly committed on 30.04.2012 or

thereabout. It is not disputed by the prosecution, in

response to the Court query, that neither the Income Tax

Department nor the Nagpur Municipal Corporation lodged a

complaint. The complaint is lodged by Mr. Laximkant

Murarka on 11.12.2016. The applicants assert, which

assertion is not disputed, that he is disgruntled apartment

purchaser, and is the President of the Society who put forth

several grievances leading to a meeting dated 26.04.2015.

The furthe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top