Sanjay Shankar Shirwardhankar v. State Of Maharashtra
SMITA JOHNSON GONSALVES JOHNSON GONSALVES Date: 2025.07.02 20:27:01 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No.2770 of 2024 Sanjay Shankar Shriwardhankar Aged: 59 years, Occ. Retired, R/o. at Post. Borlipanchatan, Tal. Shriwardhan, Dist. Raigad ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra through the Dighi Sagari Police Station, Borlipanchatan, Tal. Shrivardhan, Dist. Raigad ... Respondent ---- Mr Balwant Salunkhe, for the applicant.
Mr MG Patil, APP, for the respondent/ State.
IO API Hanumant Dada Shinde, Dighe Sagari Police Station, Raigad, is present.
---- Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 1 July 2025.
P.C.:
.
Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent/ State.
2.
By this application, the applicant is seeking relief of anticipatory bail as he apprehends arrest in connection with CR
No.21 of 2024 dated 1 March 2024, registered at Dighi Sagari Police Station, Raigad, for the offences punishable under Section 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.
The FIR, lodged at the instance of the Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, alleges that the applicant, who served as the Gram Sevak between the period 2011 to 2014, was involved in the misappropriation of funds related to the Gram Panchayat.
4.
Upon perusing the records, it appears that the co-accused was granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 7 October 2024 in ABA No.1428 of 2024. The alleged misappropriation pertains to the period between 2011 and 2014, during which the applicant was serving as a Gramsevak of the Dighi Group Gram Panchayat. The FIR was registered nearly a decade after the alleged misappropriation, and the delay in lodging the FIR remains unexplained. Furthermore, the audit report was not submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the Gram Panchayat as mandated by the relevant statutory provisions. Instead, the Block Development Officer of the Panchayat Samiti relied upon the audit report to initiate the registration of the FIR. Moreover, the learned APP, on instructions from the investigating officer present in the Court, informs the Court that the applicant has attended the police station and has
cooperated with the investigation as directed by this Court vide passing an interim protection order dated 14 October 2024. Now, the prosecution does not want the custody of the applicant.
5.
In light of the above, the application is allowed. The interim order dated 14 October 2024 is confirmed. 6.
The applicant shall continue to cooperate with the investigation and shall not influence the witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence.
7.
The application stands disposed of accordingly. (R.N. Laddha, J.)