Raju Chhotumiya Shaikh v. The State Of Maharashtra
2026:BHC-AUG:16776
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 362 OF 2026 Raju s/o Chhotumiya Shaikh, Age 40 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. Pandharwadi, Tq. Georai Dist. Beed.
...
Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra, Through Office Incharge, Police Station Beed (City) Dist. Beed.
...
Respondent.
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr.Murkute J.M.
A.P.P. for Respondent/State : Mr. S. V. Hange ...
CORAM
: SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 15.04.2026 PER COURT :
Heard both sides.
2.
The applicant is seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No. 139/2024, registered with Beed City Police Station, Disti. Beed, for the offences punishable under Section 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 66(d) of Information Technology Act.
3.
The applicant is arrested on 16.01.2026. The charge-sheet is filed on 22.11.2025. Its an economic offence involving amount of more than Rs.2,50,00,000/-.
4.
It is alleged in the report lodged by Assistant Director that Chief Minister Employment Generation Scheme was floated to provide financial 1/3
assistance to young entrepreneurs to promote employment generations. In a meeting dated 13.06.2024 convened at the office of Collector Beed, it was disclosed that misusing the scheme, the amounts were transmitted to third persons from the Government exchequer. On further enquiry it revealed that huge amounts were misappropriated without there being any sanction to the proposals. The applicant and other five persons were found to have indulged in creating bogus record and misusing the bank portal. The misappropriation of Rs. 2,51,00,000/- was noticed and the law was set into motion.
5.
Learned counsel Mr. Murkute for the applicant submits that a false loan profile of the applicant has been prepared. The co-accused Gopal Lokhande collected the documents and acted as an agent. Whatever amount received in the account of applicant was promptly transferred to Gopal Lokhande. The applicant has not derived any benefit. My attention is adverted to account statement to show that applicant transferred the amount. A ground of parity is pressed into service in the wake of order passed in case of co-accused Arbaaz Firoz Pathan. 6.
The submissions are refuted by the respondent on the ground that the applicant is part of conspiracy and played active role. Incriminating material is collected to show his complicity. The statement of bank account would disclose that huge amounts were credited to his account unauthorizedly. He is liable for Rs. 55,37,367/-. He transferred the amounts to different persons. He is a history-sheeter. 7.
The applicant had applied for the benefits of the scheme. According to him co-accused Gopal Lokhande was the agent and used to collect documents. He is alleged to have created loan profile. The applicant did not lodge any complaint against Gopal Lokhande or any other person. The bank concerned was not apprised of the mischief played by the co-accused. The applicant cannot be said to be innocent and ignorant of the overt act of 2/3
other co-accused.
8.
His statement of account of State Bank of India reveals that near about 24,00,000/- were credited by different transactions on 25.01.2024. Thereafter on 29.02.2024 further amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- was credited by distinct transactions. He is unable to account for the transactions. The respondent is right in submitting that incriminating material is collected against him during the course of investigation. An aggregate amount of Rs. 43,42,894/- appears to have been credited to his account. He is involved in three distinct Cyber crimes bearing Crime No. 65/2024, 66/2024 and 76/2024, besides the presence offence. The amount of public exchequer has been defalcated. I find no merit in the submissions of the applicant. 9.
Bail Application is rejected.
( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) mkd/- 3/3