Nilesh Shantaram Wani In Jail Custody v. State Of Maharashtra

(910)-BA-773-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.773 OF 2024 Nilesh Shantaram Wani ...

Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...

Respondents ------------------- Mr. Aashuutosh Srivastava, for the applicant. Ms. Geeta Mulekar, APP, for the Respondent/State. Mr. Rishabh Tiwari a/w Vivekananda Krishnan, Chaitali Bhogle, Amol Wagh I.by Sagar Kasar, for respondent no. 4.

---------------------

CORAM

:

ANIL S. KILOR, J.

Digitally signed by VARSHA DEEPAK GAIKWAD Date:

2024.08.19 14:20:31 +0530 VARSHA DEEPAK GAIKWAD DATE :

7TH AUGUST, 2024.

PC:

1.

Heard.

2.

By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the applicant is seeking bail in Crime No.70 of 2022, registered with Wakad Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 467, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code r/w. Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, r/w Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors ( In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.

varsha

(910)-BA-773-2024.doc 3.

Having gone through the charge-sheet and the relevant material collected by the IO during the investigation, it is evident that the applicant was working as as Customer Support Executive in Infinox Company which alleged to have duped investors by huge amount. According to the applicant, he acted upon the instructions of the main accused Vijay Mehta, who is absconding, however, after going through the charge-sheet, it is evident that the applicant has played a vital role. He used to conduct seminars and would convince the investors to invest the huge amount in the Infinox Company. 4.

Thus, considering the nature of allegations against the applicant and the evidence collected against the applicant coupled with the amount involved and the number of investors, I do not find the present case as fit for grant of bail. Accordingly, it is rejected. However, liberty is granted to apply after six months before the trial Court, if there is no progress in the trial.

(ANIL S. KILOR, J) varsha