Reena Shatrudhan Samrat @ Disha Mehta v. State Of Maharashtra
913_ABA_1892_24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1892 OF 2024 Reena Shatrudhan Samrat @ Disha Mehta ...
Applicant vs.
The State of Maharashtra ...
Respondent Mr. Ravindra P. Kadam for applicant.
Ms. Rutuja Anil Amberkar, APP for respondent-State. CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J.
DATE :
26th JULY, 2024 P.C. :
.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State.
2.
By this application, the applicant seeks anticipatory bail as she apprehends arrest in connection with FIR No.0981 of 2023 dated 14.10.2023 registered at Police Station Virar, District Mira-Bhayandar, Vasai-Virar, for offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 and Sections 420 and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3.
The Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail application of the applicant on 26.06.2024 on the ground that the case involves serious economic offences and that innocent investors, including the informant, were duped of large sums of money.
4.
This Court has perused the statement of the informant leading to registration of FIR. Prima facie, the ingredients of the offences are made out. 5.
In any case, certain documents brought to the notice of this Court by by PRIYA KAMBLI Date:
2024.07.30 10:30:37 +0530 PRIYA KAMBLI 1/2
913_ABA_1892_24.doc the learned APP indicate that in the application, the applicant has not come out with true facts. The investigation papers were placed before this Court for perusal. The learned APP submitted that while there were 15 members of the co-operative credit society involved in the present case at the time of its registration and inception, certain documents were submitted before the concerned bank, wherein the account of the credit society was being operated. Photocopy of one of the documents specifically brought to the notice of this Court records that the applicant is shown as the chairperson of the co-operative credit society, the co-accused i.e. the husband of the applicant is shown as the secretary and one Pawan Kumar Singh is shown as the treasurer. The said document while being submitted before the concerned bank, appears to bear the signature of the applicant. 6.
In this backdrop, the contents of the present application are perused and it is found that the applicant contends that she is innocent and that she is merely a pigmy agent of the co-operative credit society and she was only collecting money from the investors and duly depositing the same with the co-operative credit society. In fact, specific statements in that regard were advanced on behalf of the applicant to the effect that she is only a pigmy agent and since there is no major role of the applicant in the context of the co-operative credit society, she is entitled to anticipatory bail. 7.
The aforesaid document procured by the investigating officer during the course of investigation, falsifies the statements made on behalf of the applicant, as she is the chairperson of the said co-operative credit society. On this ground alone, the present application deserves to be dismissed. 8.
Accordingly, the application is dismissed.
(MANISH PITALE, J) 2/2 Priya Kambli