Mukul Gopinath Inamdar v. State Of Maharashtra

2023:BHC-AS:31283 Santosh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2909 OF 2023 Mukul Gopinath Inamdar ...Applicant

Versus

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Ashish Patankar, a/w Swaraj Patole, Pratik Rajopadhye, for the Applicant.

Smt. Ashwini Takalkar, APP for the State/Respondent. API Bhujbal, Pandharpur Police Station, present.

CORAM:

N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATED:

18th OCTOBER, 2023 ORDER:- 1.

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State.

2.

This is an application for pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.345 of 2023, registered with Pandharpur City Police Station, Solapur Rural, for an offence punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("the Penal Code").

3.

The first informant was in need of a loan to the tune of Rs.60,00,00,000/-. His application for loan submitted to Cosmos Bank was not getting processed expeditiously. Hence the first informant withdrew the loan application. 1/4

Co-accused Aarti Joshi was the loan processing officer. The first informant alleges, co-accused Aarti Joshi introduced the applicant and her brother Raju Inamdar. It was represented that Raju would secure loan for the first informant. Initial negotiations failed. Later on, Aarti Joshi again induced the first informant to pay amount to Raju Inamdar by representing that she would persuade Raju Inamdar to secure the loan for less commission. Raju Inamdar induced the first informant to part with a sum of Rs.18,00,000/-. Neither, the loan was sanctioned. Nor the amount of Rs.18,00,000/- was repaid. Cheque drawn by Raju Inamdar was also dishonored on presentment. Hence, the report. 4.

Prima facie allegations are primarily against Aarti Joshi and Raju Inamdar. The applicant is stated to be the friend of Aarti Joshi and sister of Raju Inamdar. Indeed, there are allegations in the FIR that the applicant was present when the discussion took place and had also conference call with the first informant and other co-accused. The first informant, however, does not allege that the applicant had made any false representation or any amount was credited to the account of the applicant.

2/4

5.

The learned APP submitted that a sum of Rs.50,000/- has been credited to the account of the applicant by coaccused Raju Inamdar, who is his brother. Having regard o the relationship inter se accused Nos.2 and 3 the said payment does not incriminate the applicant.

6.

I am, therefore, persuaded to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant.

7.

Hence, the following order.

: O R D E R :

(i) In the event of arrest of the applicant in CR No.345 of 2023, registered with Pandharpur City Police Station, Solapur Rural, the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a PR Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and attend Pandharpur City Police Station on 30th and 31st October, 2023 in between 10.00 am. to 1.00 pm. (iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or give threat or inducement to the first informant or any of the persons acquainted with the facts of the case.

3/4

(iv) It is clarified that these prima facie observations are confined to determine entitlement to pre-arrest bail only.

(v) Application stands disposed.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] Signed by: Santosh S. Kulkarni Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 19/10/2023 14:35:50 4/4