Rakesh Rajanikant Randive v. State Of Maharashtra

Digitally signed by DINESH SADANAND SHERLA Date:

2025.01.31 19:25:24 +0530 DINESH SADANAND SHERLA 901-aba-1362-23.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1362 OF 2023 Rakesh R. Randive ...Applicant V/s.

State of Maharashtra & Anr.

...Respondents.

..............

Mr. Dilip Shinde for the Applicant.

Mr. Swapnil Walve, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Anand S. Patil for the Respondent No.2.

..............

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

31.01.2025.

P.C. :

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 231 of 2023 registered at Juna Rajwada Police Station, Kolhapur for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

3.

The complainant is a jeweller. According to the complainant, during the period from 3.5.2022 to 3.6.2022, the applicant, who was known to him and was in the business of preparing gold ornaments had induced him to deliver 2.886 kg of silver worth Rs.1,87,590/- and 10.790 gms of gold worth Rs.56,108/- on the pretext that he would sale the said silver and gold through his shop and would pay him the amount received from such sale. It is alleged that the applicant had neither returned the said silver or gold nor paid the amount.

Dinesh S. Sherla 1/2

901-aba-1362-23.doc 4.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent / State. 5.

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that it was purely commercial transaction and the applicant has returned the silver and gold in question to the complainant. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation.

6.

On the other hand, the learned APP submits that the applicant is involved in three more crimes of similar nature. It is submitted that the applicant therefore may not be released on anticipatory bail.

7.

Considering the fact that the applicant is involved in three more crimes of similar nature, I am not inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the Application is rejected. 8.

The interim order dated 04.05.2023 stands vacated. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] Dinesh S. Sherla 2/2