Vaibhav Balasaheb Vidhate v. The State Of Maharashtra

2025:BHC-AUG:29515 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1581 OF 2025 Vaibhav Balasaheb Vidhate

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Yuvraj S. Choudhari APP for Respondent No.1: Mr. P. P. Dawalkar.

.....

CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.

DATED : 16th OCTOBER, 2025.

O R D E R :- 1.

This is an application for grant of regular bail under section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 in connection with crime No. 667 of 2024 registered with M.I.D.C. police station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(3), 318(4) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 3 of The Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (MPID Act). 2.

The informant averred in the report that the applicant is one of the Director of Dhandai Urban Nidhi Patsanstha Limited, Jeur, Tq and district Ahmednagar. His father was also one of the Director of the said credit society. The applicant and other co-accused have

-2made conspiracy and assured the people by visiting their residential house that they will get more interest and compelled them to deposit huge amount in their credit society. The amount was regularly collected. But since last six months prior to the date of filing of report, the applicant and co-accused were not returning the amount of the depositors. On 26.8.2024, they locked the branch of the credit society at Jeur and ran away. The informant alongwith 33 persons are cheated for an amount of Rs.94,14,296/-. The details of the amount is stated in the report. Therefore, the report is lodged. 3.

Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not Director of the said credit society. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has roots in the society. He will not flee away from the trial. The trial will take a long period. The grounds of arrest were not communicated to the applicant. It is lastly prayed to allow the application.

4.

Learned A.P.P. for the respondent-State strongly opposed the application and submitted that the applicant is involved in serious crime. There is strong material against the applicant. If he is released on bail, he will pressurize the prosecution witnesses and tamper with the evidence. It is lastly prayed to reject the application.

-35.

Perused the charge sheet, particularly the report and the statements of witnesses. The applicant is arrested in serious crime. The applicant and co-accused have duped the investors for total amount of Rs.94,14,296/-. It is a deep routed conspiracy on the part of the applicant and the co-accused persons. The co-accused are not yet arrested. If the applicant is released on bail, he will certainly pressurize the prosecution witnesses and tamper with the evidence. Considering all these reasons, certainly the applicant is not entitled for bail. The application therefore, deserves to be rejected, as the case is not made out for grant of bail on the principle that bail is rule and jail is exception. Hence, the following order.

O R D E R

Application is rejected.

(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/