Dashrath Govindrao Bhosle v. The State Of Maharashtra
2025:BHC-AUG:4746
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1036 OF 2024 DASHRATH GOVINDRAO BHOSLE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...
Advocate for Applicant : Ms. Sushama Tukaram Jadhav APP for Respondent/State: Mr. B. B. Bhise ...
WITH ...
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1037 OF 2024 UDDHAV GOVINDRAO KHADE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Nitin Trimbak Tribhuwan APP for Respondent/State Mr. B. B. Bhise ...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
DATE : 18.02.2025 P.C. :
1] Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned APP for the respondent-State.
2] The applicants have approached this Court apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.115/2024, dated 13.03.2024, registered with Georai Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable
under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of IPC. 3] In ABA/1037/2024, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Gadi for the period 2010 - 2013. The case put up by the prosecution is that the applicant was in possession of the old cheques and that he has utilized the same to transfer certain funds of the panchayat in the year 2024 in the account of two beneficiaries. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has not utilized any old cheques. He further submits that even if the cheques were utilized they will have to be signed with the signature of the present Sarpanch. In any event, he submits that the evidence is documentary, which is available with the prosecution, as such, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. 4] In ABA/1036/2024, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was the Gramsevak and makes similar submissions that the applicant is not in custody of the old cheques and that he is not involved in the crime.
5] Considering the submissions, this court is of prima facie view that the evidence is documentary in nature and available with the prosecution. So also, there is no evidence as regards the benefit received by the applicants
from the alleged transfer. Thus, the interim order passed by this court, dated 27.06.2024 would stand confirmed. 6] In view of the above, the interim protection granted by order dated 27.06.2024 stands confirmed, on the following terms:
i] The applicants shall attend the police station as and when required by the Investigating Officer. ii] The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. They shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.
iii] The applicants shall co-operate with the investigation and also in the proceedings before the trial Court.
iv] The applicants to place on record the details of address along with phone numbers.
v] The applicants to respond to the communication made by the Investigating Officer.
7] In the event, the applicants violate any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled.
8] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail applications and the trial Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.
9] The applications stand disposed of.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe