Shubham Kamlakar Madavi v. State Of Mha.Thr. Pso Gadchiroli Tq. And Dist.Gadchiroli

21 aba 846-2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Application (ABA) No.846 of 2021 Mr Shubham Kamlakar Madavi,

Versus

State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., Police Station Gadchiroli, Taq. & Dist. Gadchiroli.

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Shri N.P. Meshram, Advocate for applicant Ms T.H. Udeshi, A.P.P. for non-applicant/State CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J.

DATED : 01 MARCH In this case, the allegations against the applicant are of duping the complainant by Rs.80,000/- on the pretext that he will help the applicant to purchase the motorcycle at the heavy discounted rate.

2.

The applicant is, seeking pre-arrest bail in Crime No.655 of 2021 dated 25/08/2021, registered with Police Station Gadchiroli, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that he is not involved in the alleged offence and though there is no connection with the said offence, he has been falsely implicated by the complainant because the applicant made a

21 aba 846-2021.odt demand of repayment of loan amount. It is submitted that the applicant is having no criminal antecedents, accordingly he prays for grant of pre-arrest bail.

4.

On the other hand, Ms T.H. Udeshi, learned APP vehemently opposed the application and submits that the complainant is not the only one who was duped by the applicant, but there are about 25 to 28 similar persons, who had been duped by the applicant and the amount involved is more than Rs.22,00,000/-. The learned APP has pointed out the modus operandi of the applicant and thereby it is prayed that the present application may be rejected. 5.

On perusal of the case diary and after going through the contents of the First Information Report, it is clear that the offence is serious. From the case diary, it is revealed that there are about 25 to 28 complaints against the applicant about duping the people.

6.

In that view of the matter and as, prima facie, incriminating material is available on record against the applicant, I am not inclined to grant bail in this matter. The Criminal Application is rejected, accordingly. [ANIL S. KILOR, J.] R.S.Sahare Signed By:RANJANA SAMEER SAHARE