Nandesh Laxman Chinchore v. The State Of Maharashtra

10 ABA 809 OF 2016.doc vks

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.809 OF 2016 Nandesh Laxman Chinchhore .... Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. I. M. Khairadi, for the Applicant.

Mrs. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM : A. M. BADAR, J.

DATE : 27th JUNE, 2016.

P.C. :

1.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State.

2.

The role attributed to the present applicant in the crime in question is to the effect that he acted as mediator between DDS Sales Pvt. Ltd and main accused Dr. Ashwini Kumar for sale of furniture. The perusal of F.I.R. goes to show that present applicant Nandesh Chinchore is well acquainted with the owner of DDS Sales Pvt. Ltd. He introduced Dr. Ashwini Kumar to the owner of the shop. Dr. Ashwini Kumar had taken furniture worth Rs.6,42,353 from said DD Sales Pvt. Ltd and issued cheque for Rs.14,57,317/- to the owner of that furniture shop. This amount 1/2

10 ABA 809 OF 2016.doc was covering the cost of articles of which delivery was taken, so also the articles which were to be delivered. So far as the present applicant is concerned, cheque of Rs.4,57 lacs was taken from him by the owner of shop as security and the said cheque was to be returned on encashment of cheque given by the purchaser.

3.

Prima facie it is seen that the applicant had only intervened in the transaction. He appears to be well acquainted with the owner of the shop. The F.I.R. itself reveals that same modus operandi was used by Dr. Ashwini Kumar for cheating several shop keepers in Solapur. 4.

Considering the role attributed to the present applicant, his liberty needs to be protected and therefore following order. Order I) Application is allowed.

II) Ad-interim order dated 4.5.2016 granting anticipatory bail to the applicant is confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

III) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any persons acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts either to the Court or to any police officer. IV) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

[A. M. BADAR, J.] 2/2