Pramodkumar Wasudeoramteke v. State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Gondia (Gramin) Dist Gondia
1 aba748.21
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.
OF 20 (PRAMODKUMAR WASUDEO RAMTEKE....VS.. STATE OF MAH. THR. PSO PS, GONDIA(RURAL), DIST. GONDIA) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri S.K.Bhandarkar, Advocate for Applicant.
Shri V.A.Thakre, A.P.P. for Non-applicant/State. Shri S.K.Utwal & Shri S.K.Soni, Advs. to Assist Prosecution. CORAM : A NIL S. KILOR , J.
DATED : FEBRUARY 18 , 20 .
This is an application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.428 of 2021, registered on 30/09/2021 with Police Station, Gondia (Rural) on a complaint of one Sujata Vijay Bansod against the applicant and six other accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 504 and 507 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2.
It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant Mrs.Sujata Vijay Bansod lodged a complaint alleging therein that the present applicant along with main accused Uttam Mohan Khandekar by giving false promise of employment in Railway Department, extracted money from the husband of the complainant and her nephew. It is further alleged that there are many persons like the complainant who are the victims of the present applicant
2 aba748.21 and other accused persons from whom the accused persons have extracted money on the said pretext.
3.
I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the non-applicant/ State.
4.
Shri Bhandarkar, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the only allegation against the applicant is that he introduced the complainant with the main accused. He submits that he has no connection with the alleged offence.
5.
It is submitted that this Court had protected the applicant by granting ad-interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 02/11/2021 and thereafter on many occasions, as directed by this Court, he had attended the Police Station. He, therefore, prays that the interim protection may be confirmed by allowing the present application.
6.
On the other hand, learned A.P.P. Shri Thakre strongly opposed the application and made available the case diary for perusal.
7.
After going through the case diary and the contents of the FIR, it is revealed that during investigation the Investigating Agency has collected sufficient material
3 aba748.21 against the applicant to show his involvement. The Investigating Agency has also collected CDR of the present applicant where-from it can be seen that the applicant is having connection all over India. 8.
The learned APP states that the custody of the applicant is necessary to unearth the racket involved in such offences.
9.
Considering the material collected by the Investigating Agency in this matter against the applicant and also looking at the seriousness of the offence and the purpose for which the custody is necessary, I am not inclined to allow the present application.
The application is rejected.
JUDGE RRaut..
Signed By:RAJIV BABARAO RAUT PRIVATE SECRETARY