Sandesh Uttam Chand Jain v. The State Of Maharashtra

2025:BHC-AUG:11368 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 575 OF 2025 Sandesh Uttamchand Jain, Age : 35 years, Occupation Service, R/o. Vakharkar Nagar, Near Samta Bhavan, Varkhedi, Taluka and District Dhule.

... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra Through its Ramanand Nagar Police Station, Taluka and District Jalgaon.

.....

Mr. Harshal P. Randhir, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. V. M. Jaware, APP for Respondent-State.

.....

CORAM :

ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.

Reserved on : 17.04.2025 Pronounced on : 21.04.2025 ORDER :

1.

Applicant seeks enlargement on regular bail on account of his arrest in crime no. 61 of 2025 registered at Ramanand Nagar Police Station, District Jalgaon for offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). 2.

Learned counsel pointed out that FIR is dated 08.02.2025 alleging economic loss from the period from 15.01.2023 to 03.02.2025. It is further pointed out that entire amount has been

-2repaid along with interest. That, two other accused are already beneficiaries of anticipatory bail. According to him, entire investigation pertains to documentary evidence which are already seized. That, no further recovery or discovery is to be made and as applicant is ready to abide all and any conditions imposed by this Court, learned counsel urges for grant of bail. 3.

Learned APP opposed on the ground that investigation revealed that applicant has transferred amount to co-accused and as such, two more persons, namely Gahininath and Tiwari are also found to be involved and both of them have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. For above reasons, bail is opposed.

4.

Heard. Perused the FIR dated 08.02.2025 at the instance of Sushilkumar Omprakash Ashofa, who reported police that he and deceased Pramod Chri were working as directors in a company named Star Cooler. That, on account of demise of his partner Pramod, his family shifted to Mumbai and abroad. He claims that daughter of his deceased partner Pramod, namely Sanyojita informed that she and her deceased mother were nominees for the account of her father Pramod and there was balance of Rs.1,46,92,882/- and that she had obtained heirship certificate, but when she operated the account, she

-3realized that Rs.26,00,000/- have been withdrawn by someone. On receipt of such information, as it was not possible for her to lodge report, informant was requested and he lodged report. Consequently, crime is registered against unknown person for withdrawal of Rs.26,00,000/-. In above crime, applicant is said to be arrested on 17.02.2025.

5.

Statement is made across the bar that entire amount of Rs.26,00,000/- along with interest has been duly repaid. This fact is not refuted by learned APP. When amount allegedly transferred without authorization is said to be repaid along with interest, and when no purpose is further shown to be achieved by further detention of the applicant, though investigation is not over, as regards to him, further investigation can be carried out by securing applicant's presence. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:

ORDER

I.

The application is allowed.

II.

Applicant be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 61 of 2025 registered at Ramanand Nagar Police Station, District Jalgaon, on executing Personal Bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, on the following conditions: [a] The applicant shall not tamper prosecution evidence.

-4- [b] The applicant shall not leave the area of jurisdiction of the concerned police station till conclusion of trial. [c] The applicant shall attend the concerned police station daily on every Monday between 11.00 a.m. to 02.00 p.m. till filing of charge sheet and thereafter, shall regularly attend each and every effective date before the trial court.

[ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.] vre