Gahininath Umesh Saindane v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2025:BHC-AUG:16026-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 9 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2023 OF 2025 GAHININATH UMESH SAINDANE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Mr. M. D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Applicant.

Mrs. P. R. Bharaswadkar, APP for Respondent No.1/State. ...

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATE : 24 JUNE 2025 ORDER :

.

Present application has been filed for quashing the FIR vide Crime No.61 of 2025 dated 08.02.2025 registered with Ramanand Nagar Police Station, District Jalgaon for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2.

Heard learned Advocate for the applicant and learned APP for respondent No.1. There is no necessity to issue notice to respondent No.2 3.

Learned Advocate for the applicants has taken us through the contents of the FIR and also the documents filed by the applicant. The FIR has been lodged against unknown person. It appears that the [1]

informant has lodged it on behalf of another person. Respondent No.2, who claims to be the Director of Star Cooler, states that along with him one Pramod Gajanan Churi was the Director since 2008. They had family relations for about 15 years. Pramod expired on 15.01.2023 and then he was survived by his daughter Sanyojita and son Rushikesh. Sanyojita resides at Mumbai, whereas Rushikesh has settled down in United States of America. Sanyojita informed that Pramod had bank account with HDFC Bank, Kavyaratnavali Chowk, Jalgaon, to which her mother was nominee. Her mother have also expired on 03.03.2023. The balance in the bank account was Rs.1,46,92,882/-. She has thereafter taken Succession Certificate from this Court and when she checked the account, she found that around Rs.26,00,000/- have been withdrawn by somebody.

She states that she had withdrawn amount of Rs.1,22,43,067.81/-. She had also informed that amount of Rs.200/- was deposited on 11.10.2024 in the name of Pramod. When he had expired on 15.11.2023, then how the deposit is possible. Thereafter, another transaction appear to be of transfer of Rs.26,00,000/- in the name of Gaurav Sunil Tiwari. With this information, the FIR was lodged against unknown person.

4.

It appears that the applicant is apprehending his arrest and, therefore, he has obtained anticipatory bail from this Court. [2]

5.

Now, the applicant is relying on the documents from the internal communication of the bank as well as in the internal inquiry, it is stated that the Branch Manager Sandesh Jain has admitted that he had done the said transaction and, therefore, the learned Advocate for the applicant submits that it would be unjust to ask the applicant to face the further investigation and the trial.

6.

Here, at this stage, investigation is still going on and we cannot rely on the internal documents of the bank, which are now filed by the applicant. If the investigating officer collects the same, then he may come at a different conclusion, however, still everything is under scrutiny and, therefore, we do not take this to be a fit case where we should exercise our powers under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.

7.

Hence, the Criminal Application stands rejected. [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE JUDGE scm [3]