Yogesh Madhukar Isokar v. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Police Station Officer, Police Station Ballapur, Dist. Chandrapur

aba43.21.O.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.43 OF 2021 (Yogesh Madhukar Isokar Vs. State of Maharashtra thr. PSO PS Ballarpur, Dist. Chandrapur) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders of directions Court'

s or Judge'

s orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. V.B. Bhise, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. S.S. Doifode, APP for Non-Applicant/State. CORAM: ROHIT B. DEO, J.

DATE: 1 st FEBRUARY, 2021.

Heard.

2.

The applicant is apprehending arrest in Crime 653/2019 registered with Police Station Ballarpur, District Chandrapur for offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The crime is registered on the basis of report dated 07.08.2019 lodged by Mr. Vikas Bhimte.

4.

Mr. Vikas Bhimte alleges that the applicant, claiming to be the Director of National Career Academy, Shegaon, District Buldhana entered into a criminal conspiracy with co-accused, including one Kunda, to cheat the informant, and succeeded by inducing the informant to part with Rs.2,50,000/- by falsely promising to secure a government job. According to the report, other than the

aba43.21.O.odt informant, several other gullible unemployed persons are cheated by the applicant herein, who promised to secure government job.

5.

The learned Sessions Judge, inter alia, noted that there is more than sufficient material to reveal the direct involvement of the applicant in the crime. It is further noted that the applicant has criminal antecedents and he is already facing prosecutions involving serious offences, which makes him a flight risk.

6.

I have perused the say of the prosecution submitted in the Court of Sessions Judge. It does appear that there is more than ample material indicating the complicity of the applicant in the crime. It would be necessary to custodially interrogate the applicant to unearth the various facets including the role played by the absconding co-accused Ravindra. According to the prosecution, the applicant is involved in similar offences in the past.

7.

No discretion can be exercised in favour of the applicant.

8.

The application is dismissed.

JUDGE NSN