← Library
Bombay High CourtABA/26/2019rejected

Shekharchand Balkrushna Jain v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., P.S. Borakhedi

2019-03-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice Murlidhar Ganpatrao Giratkar2 pages

aba26.19 9

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.26/2019 Shekharchand Balkrushna Jain ..vs..

State of Mah., thr. PSO PS Borakhedi, Tahsil Malkapur, District Buldhana ............................................................................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................................................. Shri A.K.Madane, Counsel for the Applicant.

Shri A.R.Chutke, Addl.P.P. for the State.

CORAM

: M.G.GIRATKAR, J.

DATED : MARCH 18, 2019.

1.

Heard learned counsel Shri A.K.Madane for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri A.R.Chutke for the State.

2.

Learned counsel Shri A.K.Madane for the applicant submits that driver Mukesh intentionally took name of the present applicant. The applicant is not involved in crime.

3.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri A.R.Chutke for the State points out affidavit of said Mukesh. The said affidavit is in case diary.

4.

The affidavit of Mukesh shows that he was driver of the present applicant. He requested the applicant to increase his salary then he told him to go to Buldana. The applicant arranged everything to reach to Buldana. After 4-5 days, the applicant went to Khamgaon. He along with one Advocate Shukla went to Tax Office and obtained signature .....2/-

aba26.19 9 of Singare. He stated that he did not purchase any cotton and never remained present at Buldana. He is residing at Indoor.

The applicant not paid the amount of Rs.1,60,30,402/-.

5.

Learned counsel Shri A.K.Madane for the applicant submits that offence of Year 2013 and report is lodged in the year 2018. Delay can be explained by the prosecution before the Court.

6.

At this stage, prima facie, I find that the applicant is involved in the crime. Hence, the criminal application for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected and disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE !! BRW !!

...../-