Harshini @ Harshili W/O Dushyant Salwanakar v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O. P.S. Jaripatka, Nagpur
2025:BHC-NAG:2897
(1) 39.ABA.75.2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.75 OF 2025 Harshini @ Harshili w/o Dushyant Salwanakar Vs.
State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Police Station, Jaripatka, Nagpur -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Aasavari S. Kale, Counsel for the applicant. Mr. H. N. Prabhu, APP for the non-applicant/State. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : 28/02/2025 1.
Apprehending the arrest at the hands of police in connection with Crime No.26/2025 registered with Police Station, Jaripatka, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the applicant approached this Court for grant of bail. 2.
As per the allegation in the first information report, the applicant has obtained the documents of the informant and without her knowledge obtained the loan amount in her name by misusing the said documents and duped her. During the investigation, ten other persons came forward, who were similarly duped by the present applicant. On the basis of the said report, police have registered the crime against the present applicant.
(2) 39.ABA.75.2025 3.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, who submitted that as far as the allegations by the informant and the other persons are concerned, only to implicate the present applicant with the alleged offence, this false report is lodged. She submitted that neither the applicant has issued any cheques to anybody nor any such loans obtained. She submitted that there is no material to connect the present applicant with the alleged offence, therefore custodial interrogation is not required. In view of that, the applicant be released on bail.
4.
Learned APP strongly opposed the said application on the ground that ten more persons whose statements are recorded by the investigating officer shows the involvement of the present applicant with the similar modus operandi, she has obtained the documents from various persons, obtained the loan and misused the said amount. Thus, considering the involvement of the present applicant in economic offence, the application deserves to be rejected.
5.
On perusal of the investigation papers and on hearing of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State, it reveals that the involvement of the present applicant is in economic offence and she has misappropriated the amount by obtaining the loan in
(3) 39.ABA.75.2025 the name of the informant and other ten persons. Considering the same, at this stage, no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. In view of that, the application deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order:
ORDER
The application is hereby rejected.
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) Sarkate