Ravindra Vasant Rane v. The State Of Maharashtra
1/4 nsc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1917 OF 2015 Ravindra Vasant Rane ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.95 OF 2016 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1917 OF 2015 Mahendra Nandram Pardeshi ...Intervener
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Ravindra Vasant Rane ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
Mr.Saikumar Pathrudu M, for the Applicant Ms. Veera Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent-State Mr.Satyavrat Joshi, for the Intervener.
PSI - D.R.Mohite, Dattawadi Police Station, Pune City. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
DATE : 30th MARCH, 2016
2/4 P.C. :
1.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.P.P and learned counsel for the intervener.
2.
By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.303 of 2015 registered with the Dattawadi Police Station, Pune, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3.
According to the complainant, the applicant was a Divisional Manager of 'Shriram City Union Finance Limited' at the relevant time, when demand drafts worth Rs.21,38,000/- were handed over by the complainant to co-accused - Suyash More and Zuber Shaikh, for depositing the said amounts in Fixed Deposits of 'Shriram City Union Finance Limited'. It is alleged that the applicant and co-accused did not deposit the said demand draft in the name of the complainant and instead used the whole amount for their personal benefits. 4.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant
3/4 was not in service of 'Shriram City Union Finance Limited' during the period from 2011 to 2014, when the demand drafts were given by the complainant to the co-accused. He submitted that the applicant joined the 'Shriram City Union Finance Limited', only in 2014 and as such was not even remotely connected with the alleged transaction. 5.
Learned APP on the instructions of the Investigating Officer, who is present in the Court, states that the investigating officer has verified the aforesaid fact and states that the applicant was not in service during the relevant time, when the demand drafts were given by the complainant to co-accused - Suyash More and Zuber Shaikh, who are absconding. 6.
Considering the aforesaid, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail on the following terms and conditions :
ORDER
(i) In the event of the arrest, the applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
4/4 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 are confined to this application and the learned Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein. 9.
In view of the disposal of the Anticipatory Bail Application No.1917 of 2015, the Intervention Application being Criminal Application No.95 of 2016 does not survive and the same is also disposed of. 10.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.