Yauvan Gambhir S/O Late Shri Jeevan Gambhir v. State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Dhantoli Nagpur And Another

2024:BHC-NAG:11312 16.appp.1673.24.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1673 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1290 OF 2020 (Yauvan Jeevan Gambhir Vs. State of Maharashtra) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.D. Bhate, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. S.A. Ashirgade, APP for the State.

CORAM:- URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

DATED :- OCTOBER 4, 2024 By this application the applicant is seeking relaxation or modification of conditions of bail. 2.

While considering the bail application of the applicant who was arrested in Crime No.181/2019 registered at police station Dhantoli, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Section 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, 120-B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 and Sections 65, 66(B) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

3.

While releasing the applicant on bail, this Court has considered that there are 80 witnesses to be examined in the instant case. As per the statement of the learned Counsel for the applicant, he had already repaid an amount of Rs.83.90 lakhs. There is no likelihood of commencement of the trial and considering that his custodial interrogation is required for the investigation

16.appp.1673.24.odt purpose. He was directed to attend the police station once in a month i.e. on first Monday of each month in between 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon.

4.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that since last four years, the applicant is attending the police station and neither his statement is recorded, he is only detained in the police station for a whole day, so no purpose will be served to continue the said condition. 5.

Learned APP strongly opposed the application by filing reply and submitted that only once that attendance is given for the purpose of investigation at the office of Economic Offence Wing. Considering the nature of the offence, though charge-sheet is filed other aspects are still under the interrogation. In view of that, his attendance is required. He submitted that he has not attended the police station since 07/09/2023. 6.

Considering the stake involved in the crime as well as the role attributed to the present applicant and the Economic Office Wing is still investigating some aspects. In view of that, only once his attendance is given to the EOW. In view of that, at this stage, no case is made out for grant of any relaxation.

7.

Hence the application is rejected and the liberty can be granted to the present applicant to move before this Court after six months.

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) *Divya