← Library
Bombay High CourtABA/646/2023rejected

Ranjit S/O. Raosaheb Raut v. State Of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps City Kotwali, Dist. Amravati.

2023-11-29Hon'Ble Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.646 OF 2023 (Ranjit s/o Raosaheb Raut Vs. State of Maharashtra thr. its PSO PS City Kotwali, Dist. Amravati) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. S. B. Gandhe, Advocate for Applicant.

Mrs. Mukta Kavimandan, APP for Non-Applicant/State. CORAM: URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.

DATE: 29 th NOVEMBER, 2023.

By this application, the applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.464/2023 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Amravati for the offences punishable under sections 420, 468 and 471 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

Mr. Gandhe, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is apprehending arrest at the hands of police as crime is registered against him on the basis of report lodged by Sandip Diwakarrao Ambulkar on an allegation that at the relevant time he was serving in HDFC Limited (Housing Development Finance Corporation). The present applicant and another co-accused approached to the said HDFC Limited with request for loan and submitted the documents and obtained the loan. Some of the amount of the loan was repaid by the present applicant and other co-accused and during verification of

the documents it reveals that the present applicant and another co-accused have submitted the fabricated documents including the salary slip and other documents, in fact it reveals that the present applicant was not serving as a teacher and he prepared the false salary slip, on the basis of said report police have registered the crime. 3.

The learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the present applicant has already repaid some of the loan amount. At the most, the nature of transaction is of recovery of the amount and no criminal offence is made out. The applicant is ready to abide by all the conditions if he is protected by granting anticipatory bail.

4.

Said application is strongly opposed by the learned APP for the State by submitting that the present applicant has submitted fabricated documents to obtain the loan including the salary certificate when the present applicant was not serving in Renuka Mata Vidyalaya, Vasni, Tahsil Achalpur, District Amravati. He is absconding since the registration of the offence and prays for rejection of the bail. 5.

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, perused the investigation papers it reveals from the investigation papers that during the investigation it reveals that the applicant is not serving in Renuka Mata Vidyalaya. He submitted the salary certificate with signature of the Head Master and seal of the school. The letter issued

by the Education Officer to the investigating officer shows that applicant was never appointed in the said Renuka Mata Vidyalaya. The various record including the statement of the Head Master of the Renuka Mata Vidyalaya from which it reveals that not only the salary certificate but other documents submitted by the present applicant i.e. bank statement etc. are also the fabricated documents. The present applicant has also placed on record the Form No.16 regarding the assessment of the income tax which is also a fabricated document. Considering the investigation papers and the statement of the various witnesses prima facie case is made out against the applicant. Present applicant has obtained the loan which is public money by submitting the forged documents. In view of that the applicant is not entitled for the said protection. The application deserves to be rejected.

6.

Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order: The application is rejected.

JUDGE NSN