Vinod Shiroman Singh v. The State Of Maharashtra
ppn 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1308 OF 2017 Vinod Shiroman Singh ..
Applicant Vs.
State of Maharashtra ..
Respondent --- Mr.Vikas B. Shivarkar for the applicant.
Mr.S.S.Hulke, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent. Mr.B.A.Gaikwad, Havildar, Yerwada Police Station, Pune City. --- CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J.
DATE : 8th August 2017 P.C. :
.
The application is filed for relief of anticipatory bail in C.R. No.70 of 2017 registered with Yerwada Police Station, Pune for offence punishable under Sections 392, 452, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sides are heard.
2.
A crime was registered on the basis of the report given by Kishor Somnath Navandar on 25th January 2017. He has made an allegation against the present applicant Vinod Shiroman Singh and one more person Chetan Shankarrao Orase. The first informant Kishor Navandar had some transactions made outside of country and he wanted to collect the money in some account from other country. The present applicant and Chetan Orase offered him the services of having account in foreign country like Singapore. There was an agreement to give 5% commission to these persons for allowing Kishor to operate that account. 3.
It is the case of the first informant that in that account, no amount was credited (in the account of one Swapnil Chordia in
ppn 2 Singapore) and due to that the present applicant and Chetan Orase started saying that they had sustained loss. 4.
Allegations are made that these two persons then started pressurizing the first informant by saying that he should reimburse the loss sustained by them. Allegations are made that they compelled him to transfer the amount of Rs.21 lakh by RTGS mode into the account of Chetan in the month of December 2016. Allegations are made that in the same month, Chetan Orase and the present applicant forcibly took away the cash amount of Rs.14 lakh from his residential house. Allegations are made that in January 2017, in the night time, the present applicant came to his house with Chetan Orase and the applicant was having a pistol. He has made an allegation that by pointing pistol, he was compelled to sign the cheque of Rs.3,50,000/-. He contended that he immediately informed the bank not to honour the cheque when the accused left. He has contended that the present applicant is in the business of supplying bouncers. He has made an allegation that an amount of Rs.35 lakh was extracted from him by the accused. 5.
The present applicant has produced one account statement to show that the amount of Rs.21 lakh which was credited in the account by RTGS mode was immediately returned. It was submitted that in the account by the same mode, the complainant again transferred the amount and this conduct shows that it was voluntarily transferred. 6.
The aforesaid contention made by the complainant and the absence of any record regarding the transactions between these persons have created clear probability that the complainant wanted to collect
ppn 3 some money out of country and probably that money was black money. Though at present the complaint is made against the present applicant and one Chetan Orase, it is necessary to go into the details of these things.
7.
There is record of aforesaid nature, the transfer of amount of Rs.21 lakh in account of Chetan Orase and there is no document with regard to the nature of transactions. The circumstance creates probability of blackmail. It is necessary for the police to find out truth and for that custodial interrogation is must, this Court holds that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. In the result, the application is rejected. Interim relief is vacated.
T.V. NALAWADE, J.