Chaayabai Jagannath Shinde v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1896 OF 2015 Chayabai Jagannath Shinde ...Applicant

Versus

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Ms. Aarati Deshmukh I/b Mr. Ravindra B. Mungekar for the Applicant Ms. S. S. Kaushik, A.P.P for the Respondent-State API Mr. Mahendra Dadasaheb Dorkar from Bangurnagar Police Station is present CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

SATURDAY, 17TH OCTOBER, 2015 P.C. :

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P for the State.

2.

By this application, the applicant seeks her enlargement on bail in connection with C.R. No. 302 of 2014 registered with the Bangur Nagar Police Station, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 380, 420, 448, 454, 457, 465, 467, 468, 470, 471, 506(II) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

1/6

3.

The complainant is one Sushila Bilakanthe, aged about 62 years. She has alleged that some time in September, 2014, her friend Nirmala had come to her house and was in need of Rs. 25,000/- urgently. She has alleged that as she did not have the said amount, she took a friendly loan from Chaya Shinde. She has stated that the said Chaya Shinde arranged for a sum of Rs. 56,000/-, pursuant to which, the complainant mortgaged her house. She has further stated that after paying her friend Nirmala a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, the balance amount was retained by her, for her own medical expenses. Thereafter, the complainant is stated to have approached Mrs. Zarina requesting her to arrange for Rs. 56,000/-. Mrs.

Zarina is stated to have helped the complainant to repay the loan to Chaya Shinde, pursuant to which, the mortgaged documents of complainant's house were handed over back to the complainant. In November, 2014, as the complainant was not in a good health, she requested Vaishali Shinde (daughter of Chaya Shinde) for help, pursuant to which, Vaishali Shinde agreed to keep her at her residence. It is alleged that during the course of providing medical treatment, Vaishali Shinde informed the complainant about one Institute from where the complainant would get financial assistance for her medical treatment.

Vaishali Shinde, the complainant accompanied Vaishali Shinde and one Sachin Sonavane to the said Institution. It is alleged by the complainant that being illiterate, she signed on some Membership Form and submitted certain documents as demanded by Vaishali Shinde and Sachin Sonavane. She has stated that believing them, she handed over a signed copy of the said form along with all personal documents like Ration Card, Pan Card, Aadhar Card, etc. On 16th November, 2014, when Vaishali Shinde found the complainant's health to be serious, she admitted her at Shivam Hospital at Charkop, Kandivali. On 22nd November, 2014, the complainant was discharged from the hospital pursuant to which, she returned back to her own house, only to find that the lock of her house was broken and some third person i.e. one Kiran alias Chutki alias Chabi Suresh Kasbe was staying there. On questioning Kiran, she learnt that the said premises was rented to him by Vaishali Shinde. Pursuant to the aforesaid, a complaint was lodged by the complainant.

4.

Learned Counsel for the applicant states that as far as the present applicant Chayabai Shinde is concerned, she cannot be detained only because her daughter Vaishali Shinde is absconding. Learned Counsel 3/6

for the applicant submits that there are no allegations of forgery or fabrication of documents as against the applicant. She submits that the complainant is in possession of the premises. 5.

Learned A.P.P submits that although Vaishali Shinde is the main accused who has forged and fabricated the documents, whether or not the present applicant is also involved in the same, will be decided by the Trial Court.

6.

Perused the charge-sheet. It appears that essentially the allegations are qua Vaishali Shinde and Sachin Sonavane. Investigation is complete and charge-sheet is filed. Considering the role of the present applicant, applicant is enlarged on bail on the following terms and conditions :

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; 4/6

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on the first Saturday of every month between 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m for a period of six months from the date of her release; (iii) The applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

(iv) The applicant shall inform her latest place of residence and mobile contact number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Court seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station;

(v) The applicant to cooperate with the conduct of the trial; (vi) If there is a breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of the applicant's bail.

5/6

7.

The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

8.

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie, and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. 9.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

6/6