Ravindra Vasant Satam v. The State Of Maharashtra

1 of 2 917.ABA.438.2019.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.438 OF 2019 Ravindra Vasant Satam, Age 57 years, Occ.Business, R/o.Room No.1-105, Pimpleshwar CHS, Mahadev Palav Marg, Curry Road, Mumbai-400 011.

Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.P.B.Patil for applicant.

Mr.S.R.Agarkar, APP, for State.

Mr.Sharad S. Patil, PSI, Dadar Police Station, present. CORAM :

PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

DATE : 20th February 2019 PC :

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail in CR No.269 of 2018 registered with Dadar Police Station for offences under Sections 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 420, 504, 506(2) r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

The case of complainant is that the accused had induced the complainant to part with a sum of Rs.31 lakh with promise that room premises would be provided to him from MHADA. It is also alleged that forged documents were shown to the complainant to gain his confidence. However, the promises were not fulfilled. The cheques issued by the applicant were dishonoured.

3.

Learned advocate for applicant submitted that the FIR itself indicated that the amount of Rs.20 lakh has been refunded to the

2 of 2 917.ABA.438.2019.doc complainant. However, the complainant has suppressed the said facts and had filed complaint u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act for the entire amount. It is further submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. 4.

Learned APP, however, submitted that the applicant was instrumental in fabricating the documents purportedly issued by MHADA. Initiating proceedings u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act would not absolve the applicant from criminal prosecution. It is submitted that during the course of investigation statements of witnesses were recorded which shows the complicity of the applicant in crime.

5.

I have perused the FIR and the documents produced by learned APP. The investigation indeed disclosed the involvement of the applicant in crime. The applicant's interrogation is necessary to unearth the truth as false and fabricated documents were utilized by the applicant in commission of crime. Considering the nature of allegations, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No.438 of 2019 is rejected. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) MST