Sankeshwar Singh Vs State of Maharashtra Bombay Sessions Court Criminal Bail Application No 249 of 2021

MHCC020040772021
CNR
: MHCC02­004077­2021
Date of Institution
: 19/03/2021
Date of Registration
: 19/03/2021
Date of Judgment
: 08/04/2021
Duration
: Y :00, M :00, D :21
IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE (CBI) FOR GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO.249 OF 2021
IN
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.310 OF 2021
Sankeshwar Singh, aged about 38 yrs
R/o.B­304, Poonam Autum Building,
Poonam Nagar, Virar (West).

)
)
)..Applicant/Accused
V/s.
The State (Through CBI, EOB, Mumbai)
R.C. No.05/E/2020­CBI, EOB, Mumbai
dtd.15/09/2020
)
)
)..Respondent/CBI, EOB.

Appearance :
Ld. Adv. Mr. Darshan Juikar for applicant/accused.
SPP Mr. Nandode for the respondent/CBI, EOB, Mumbai.
CORAM : H.H. THE SPECIAL JUDGE (CBI)
SHRI VIVEK V. KATHARE
DATE : 08/04/2021 (C.R.NO.53)
ORAL ORDER
1.

The applicant/accused Sankeshwar Singh, arrested in RC
No.05/E/2020 at CBI, EOB, Mumbai, on the allegations of availing the
car loan by submitting false & fabricated documents, moved this
..2..

..2 ..

application seeking bail. The said offence is registered on the basis of
complaint received from State Bank of India, Mumbai, interalia
u/s.13(2) r/w Sec.13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 r/w
Sec.120­B r/w Sec.420, 465, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC.
2.

In nutshell, the prosecution case reveals that in between
October 2016 to March 2018, large number of car loans were
sanctioned & disbursed. They were put under scrutiny and it reveals
that forty­six car loan accounts were found to be fraud on the fake &
fabricated documents. It is alleged that applicant/accused facilitated in
getting loan amount credited to the fictitious accounts opened by co­
accused Ganesh Ubhare & Hansdeep Bhasin.

As a result, the
complainant bank has suffered a loss to the tune of Rs.17,53,11,005.97
plus applied interest & other charges.
3.

It is contended that the case is based on documentary
evidence, which has been seized by the Investigating Agency or they are
with the complainant bank, for which further custody of the applicant/
accused is not at all warranted.
4.

It is further contended that the person concerned had
applied for getting loan by submitting the relevant documents with
which the applicant has no concern. The present applicant had availed
three car loans from the complainant bank and all are repaid or paying
installments.
5.

It is submitted that the applicant is not the beneficiary of
the loan proceeds, inasmuch as, thirty­eight car loans are credited to the
..3..

..3 ..

account of M/s.G3 Motors and M/s. Krishiv Motors. The applicant had
never operated those accounts.
6.

It is submitted that the applicant had co­operated with the
Investigating Agency and was available for interrogation as & when
called for. Hence, the application.
7.

The respondent/CBI has resisted the application by filing
Reply. At the outset, it is contended that the applicant in conspiracy
with co­accused forged & fabricated several documents and availed car
loans. The loan proceeds were siphoned and subsequently not used for
the scheduled purposes.

It is submitted that investigation is at the
nascent stage and release of applicant would gravely hamper the
progress of investigation and hence, prayed for rejection of the
application.
8.

Heard the Ld. Counsel Mr. Kulkarni for applicant/accused
and the Ld. SPP Mr. Nandode.

It is a matter of record that the
applicant/accused produced in custody before the Court on 14/03/2021
and since then, he is in custody till date.

The investigation papers
reveals that thirty borrowers including accused Sankeshwar Singh had
availed the car loan from the complainant bank through Ganesh
Ubhare, Proprietor of M/s. Vroom Motors, who worked as auto loan
Counselor. The applicant had availed loan facility of Rs.1,90,00,000/­
jointly in his name & his wife Soni Singh on the basis of fake & forged
documents.

..4..

..4 ..

9.

The investigation further reveals that applicant also
facilitated sanction of loans in the name of his family members/
relatives/associates by preparing forged & bogus documents.

In
pursuance of criminal conspiracy, the applicant/accused alleged to have
forged the documents in the name of his wife Fuljaha Khan, his
neighbour Pushpa Nair, Tabassum Khan and also prepared fabricated
documents of their financial worth to make them eligible for high value
car loans.
10.

It is further evident that the applicant/accused is the
beneficiary of loan proceeds, which he obtained in the name of his
family members.

The total loan of which the applicant/accused is
shown beneficiary is of Rs.3.28 Crores.
11.

Remand papers equally shows that the applicant/accused
influence the witnesses and did not co­operate with the Investigating
Agency, which in turn hampered the investigation. He alleged to have
maintained hostile & non­co­operative attitude during the investigation
and not brought the documents or details as directed, despite service of
notice u/s.41­A of Cr.P.C. dated 02/02/2021.
12.

It is alleged by the prosecution that applicant/accused is
master mind and executor of the criminal conspiracy to obtain vehicle
loans by forging relevant documents. The Ld. SPP has submitted that
though the relevant documents have been taken charge of by
Investigating Agency, nevertheless they are required to be confronted to
applicant/accused for seeking his explanation and to unearth larger
conspiracy. In the event of release of applicant on bail, there is every
..5..

..5 ..

likelihood of his influencing the witnesses and would tamper with the
record, which may come to surface during the course of further
investigation, as it is still going on.
13.

The Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused has taken me to
the recitals of FIR/complaint to suggest that the main allegations are
against Ganesh Ubhare and the complaint is silent, specifically, the
alleged role assigned to the applicant/accused. It is further suggested
that the main accused has been enlarged on bail and therefore, the
application of the present applicant/accused deserves to be allowed.
However, it is seen that the complaint came to be filed by the concerned
bank officer highlighting the role of public servant as well as the role of
prime accused in the commission of offence.

As the investigation
proceeds, the role played by the present applicant/accused came to
light and the acts of the applicant/accused constituting the offence has
been highlighted by the Investigating Agency in their reply to bail
application. Therefore, it cannot be said that merely because the
FIR/complaint is silent pertain to the role played by applicant/accused,
he should be enlarged on bail when the subsequent investigation clearly
highlights the incriminating role attributed to the applicant/accused.
So far the bail granted to co­accused Ganesh Ubhare is concerned, it
needs to observe that said bail was granted u/s.167(2) of Cr.P.C., as the
Investigating Agency failed to file the charge­sheet within sixty days of
arrest of said accused. The said bail was granted without considering
the merit of the matter but, on account of indefeasible right accrued to
the accused. Therefore, even on parity, the application for grant of bail
cannot be considered.

..6..

..6 ..

14.

Considering the magnitude of economic offence vis­a­vis
the incriminating role of the applicant/accused in the commission of
offence and the investigation being at the nascent stage, it is not
desirable to allow the application, at this stage.
15.

Hence, the application deserves to be rejected in terms of
order below :­
ORDER
1. Criminal Bail Application No.249/2021 in CBI Remand Application
No.310/2021, is hereby rejected.
2. Application is hereby disposed off accordingly.
(Pronounced in open Court)
Mumbai:
Date: 08/04/2021
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
(VIVEK V. KATHARE)
Special Judge (CBI)
Court Room No.53, Gr. Bombay.

: 08/04/2021
: 09/04/2021
:
..7..

..7 ..

“Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order”.
09/04/2021
at about 4.00 p.m.

(Mrs. Vidya Abhijit Mande)
Stenographer (H.G.)
Court Room No.53
Name of the Hon’ble Judge
: Shri. Vivek V. Kathare
(Court Room No.53)
Date of pronouncement of Judgment/Order
: 08/04/2021
Judgment/Order signed by Hon’ble Judge on : 09/04/2021
Judgment/Order uploaded on
: 09/04/2021
at about 04.00 p.m.

….