Krishna Chandrakant Walawalkar v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Megha 13_ia_302_2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.302 OF 2022 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.43 OF 2018 Krishna Chandrakant Walawalkar In the matter between ...Applicant Niraj Mansukhlal Ved ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

....

Mr. Abhishek Deshmukh with Mr. Abhishek Matkar for the Applicant in IA/302/2022 Mr. Vaibhav Jagtap for the Applicant in ABA/43/2018 Ms Rutuja Ambekar, APP for Respondent-State.

CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED : 8th APRIL, 2022.

P.C.:- The Applicant-Intervenor has filed this application for withdrawal of an amount of Rs.1,52,87,432/- from the amount deposited by the Applicant -Niraj Ved in Anticipatory Bail Application No.43 of 2018. Said Niraj Ved deposited an amount of Rs.3,26,00,000/- during the pendency of the anticipatory bail application, pursuant to which interim bail was granted. A perusal of order dated 10/01/2018 indicates that the Applicant -Niraj Ved had made a statement before the Court that he would either hand over the possession of the agreed premises without 1/2

Megha 13_ia_302_2022.doc any encumbrances to the witnesses or will repay the amount accepted from them or in the alternative would deposit Rs.3.26 crores in the registry of this Court within a period of two weeks from the date of the order. Said statement was accepted and the Applicant was granted interim bail. Pursuant to the said statement, Applicant- Niraj deposited before this Court Rs.3.26 crores.

2.

The records reveal that interim bail of the Applicant was confirmed by order dated 03/07/2018. This Court had granted liberty to the Intervenors to have amicable settlement with the Applicant-Niraj. It is not in dispute that apart from the Intervenor, who has approached this Court there are other victims. There is no settlement between the Intervenor and other victims. The Applicant-Intervenor cannot unilaterly claim an amount of Rs.1,52,87,432/- without the consent of the other victims. This Court cannot determine the entitlement of the ApplicantIntervenor in the absence of the other parties. As observed by this Court earlier, the intervenors can arrive at an amicable settlement interse and file a joint application for withdrawal of the money. 3.

In view of above, the application is dismissed. (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) 2/2 MEGHA S PARAB by MEGHA S PARAB Date:

2022.04.12 20:17:19 +0530