North Star Gems (India) Ltd Through Its Dr.Piyush Mehta v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
920.APPLN657_2015.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Vidya Amin CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 657 OF 2015 North Star Gems (India) Ltd.
through its M.S. Dr. Piyush Mehta ... Applicant Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...
Respondents Dr. Piyush Mehta, applicant appearing in person present. Mrs. P.P. Shinde, APP for the State.
Mr. R.B. Mokashi, Advocate for respondent no. 1. CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.
DATE: 16th March, 2016.
P.C.:
The complainant Piyush Mehta in Case No. 170/MECR/2000, FIR No. 3 of 2015 registered with Santacruz Police Station, has filed this Application for cancellation of bail passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai on 8th July, 2015 in Bail Application No. 1769 of 2015. The accused is prosecuted for the offences of forgery and fraud under sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 472, 474, 434, 107, 108, 109, 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The accused was arrested on 25th June, 2015. As per the order, the accused made false entries in respect of 900 shares in the year 1997. He was granted bail on 8th July, 2015. 2.
The applicant/original informant, who is appearing in person, has submitted that the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1 / 2
920.APPLN657_2015.doc of granting bail to the accused is erroneous. The learned Judge was misled, as the case was not only upto 900 shares but the accused has made false entries of 14 lakhs shares. He further submitted that the accused has committed forgery and fraud. The police are not properly investigating the matter. The accused was arrested at Airport when he was about to leave India.
3.
Learned APP has submitted that the prosecution has not moved any application for cancellation of bail.
4.
After going through the order dated 8th July, 2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, no illegality is found. Moreover, no case is made out by the applicant/informant for cancellation of bail. There is no case that the accused has either committed similar type of offence while on bail or he has jumped the bail or he did not attend the police station.
5.
Application is dismissed.
(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) 2 / 2