Parnita W/O. Deepak Puranik v. The State Of Maharashtra
905 aba 265 20 r.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 905 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.265 OF 2020 PARNITA W/O. DEEPAK PURANIK
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Jade Rahul M.
APP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.W. Mundhe.
CORAM
: MANGESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 12.01.2021.
PER COURT :
This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Crime No. 09/2020 registered with Satara Police Station, Aurangabad, District Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Section 406, 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 and 5 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.
2.
F.I.R. No. 09/2020 was lodged on 07.01.2020. It is alleged in the F.I.R. inter alia that all the accused in furtherance of their common intention, deceived the informant by promising handsome returns and made him to contribute to the chit fund but failed to honour the promise. It was found that several other persons were also similarly duped. When the informant tried to approach the main accused Bhagirath Bajaj his office was closed. When he approached the present applicant she was evasive. Realizing that he has been duped like many others he lodged the F.I.R. on the basis of which offence is registered as Crime No. 09/2020 with Satara Police Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 and 5 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes 1/2
905 aba 265 20 r.odt (Banning) Act, 1978.
3.
The learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. Rather she is also a victim. Like the informant even she had contributed to the fund. She herself has not received any money from the informant. It is the accused No. 1 and 2 who are the main culprits who had floated the scheme and have duped her. She is ready to cooperate the Investigating Officer and being a woman may be protected. 4.
The learned A.P.P. opposes the application.
5.
I have carefully perused the F.I.R. and the papers. At the out set it is necessary to emphasize that in the F.I.R. itself it has been alleged that along with other accused even the applicant had promised the informant of high returns and had lured him in depositing money in the scheme being floated. 6.
More importantly, the F.I.R. also reads that when the informant had been to the office of the main accused and learnt about it having been closed he had approached the applicant but she was evasive. Since it is an offence involving a racket wherein several persons have been duped of their hard earned money, when there are specific allegations about involvement of the applicant as a member of the cartel and the investigation is still in progress, this is not a fit case where any relief can be granted to the applicant. 7.
The Application is rejected.
(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) mkd/- 2/2