BA- 621 of 2021
//1//
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 621 OF 2022
(CNR No.MHCC020035932022)
Edward Ashok Sharma
Age 26 years, Occ: Service
R/a Room No.303, Lovekush
Apartment, Phulpada,
Virar (East) Thane.
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of N. M. Joshi
Marg, Police Station in C.R.No.55/2021)
…Applicant/accused no. 1
….Respondent/State
CORAM : JUDGE SHRI AJAY C. DAGA
(C.R.No.23)
DATE
: 13th APRIL 2022
APPEARANCE:
Mr. Himanshu Shinde & Priya Gupta Ld. advocate for applicant/
accused no.1
Mrs. Ranjana Budhwant, Ld APP for the respondent/ State.
ORDER
Instant application is filed by the applicant for grant of bail under
section 439 of Cr.P.C., in crime no. 55 of 2021 for an offence
punishable under section 420,465,467,468,471,120B of IPC, registered
by N. M. Joshi Marg, Police Station.
2.
Facts of prosecution in brief that; the informant gave report
alleging that on 19/02/2021 in afternoon he received phone call from
Secretory Vikas Pramod Agrawal, intimating informant that he received
BA- 621 of 2021
//2//
message on his mobile that Rs.4,95,000/ got debited by somebody
using cheque bearing no.012798 from Saving Bank Account of that
Center (National Education Research Center). The informant told Vikas
Agrawal that he has not issued any cheque and cheques are lying in the
office itself. Then they visited the bank and made an inquiry about the
cheque came to know that the cheque which has been cleared was
fabricated document. The original cheque was having name “RSS KET
INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL” whereas the cheque presented was having
name “RASS KGT INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL”, even the IFC code on
the original cheque and the duplicate cheque was different. The cheque
was issued and the cleared in the name of applicant. Accordingly, report
was given.
3.
Grounds, the applicant is falsely implicated in the present crime
and has been made scapegoat in the entire episode, applicant has no
nexus with the crime. Applicant was not having any Knowledge about
cheque being bogus. There is no evidence on record to show connection
of applicant with the crime. During investigation applicant has taken
name of Nakul who is the person who by giving assurance of
employment to the applicant made him scapegoat. The amount
involved in the crime had been shown to have been handed over by
applicant to Nakul which is itself show that applicant is not beneficiary.
Except the allegation of the depositing cheque and withdrawing the
amount, no allegation against applicant, no dishonest intention of
applicant. Coaccused has been arrested and released on bail. No case is
made out. Hence, the application.
BA- 621 of 2021
4.
//3//
The respondent contested the application by filing reply vide
Exh.2 and pleaded that a forged cheque was prepared and used for the
purpose of withdrawal of Rs.4,95,000/ that forged cheque was
deposited in the account of applicant and applicant had withdrawn the
amount from the account, this itself goes to show involvement of
applicant in the crime. Even, the applicant during investigation have
stated that the Nakul has given such forged cheque books to various
other person, various SIM card have been purchased in the name of
applicant. There is prima faice involvement of applicant, cash is yet to
be recovered. There is possibility of a big racket doing this work of
preparing false and fabricated cheques. Hence, the application is
rejected.
5.
Considering
pleadings
following
points
arose
for
my
determination and I have recorded my findings thereon with reasons as
under :
Sr.
No.
1.
POINTS
Whether applicant is entitled to be
released on bail under section 439 of
FINDINGS
In the affirmative.
Cr.P.C. ?
2.
What order ?
As per final order.
REASONS
As to point no.1
6.
Heard both sides at length. Perused record. On perusal order
dated 16/06/2021 passed by me rejecting bail application of applicant,
it was rejected on that ground the coaccused was not traced out. That
BA- 621 of 2021
//4//
ground does not survive as coaccused was arrested and released on
temporary bail by learned Metropolitan Magistrate. The second ground
that the investigating officer had not recovered amount, that ground
remain as it is. Nothing on record which goes to show that since
applicant was taken in Magistrate custody at any point of time,
investigating officer made any investigation with the applicant. As such
merely because the ground for recovery of amount remains as it is.
Applicant cannot be allowed suffer. The investigation regarding co
accused has been done, therefore there is no question of any further
investigation to be done by investigating officer. It will take long time
in trial to end. Accordingly, in case bail in not granted it will amount to
punishing the applicant prior to completion of trial which itself against
settled law.
7.
Considering the nature of offence no purpose will be served in
curtailing liberty of applicant. Accordingly, I answer point no.1 in
affirmative.
Having answer point no.1 in affirmative I pass following order:
ORDER
1. Criminal Bail application No.621 of 2022 is allowed.
2. Applicant Edward Ashok Sharma be released on bail on PR bond of
Rs.30,000/(Thirty Thousand) with one or more sureties of like amount
in
crime no. 55 of 2021 for an offence punishable under section
420,465,467,468,471,120B of IPC and on condition that, applicant
shall attend N.M.Joshi Marg Police Station on very Wednesday between
2.00p.m. to 4.00p.m. for one month and thereafter to attend said police
BA- 621 of 2021
//5//
station as an when called by investigating officer, applicant shall not
pressurize or threaten informant and witnesses.
3. Bail bond be furnished before Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate.
4. As per prayer clause (b), applicant be released on provisional cash
bail of Rs.30,000/(Thirty Thousand) for the period of four weeks from
today on above condition.
5. Criminal Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
Date: 13/04/2022.
Dictated on
Transcribed on
:13/04/2022.
:13/04/2022
Signed on
:13/04/2022
(A. C. DAGA)
Additional Session Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Mumbai.
BA- 621 of 2021
//6//
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE
TIME
13/04/2022
Name of the Judge
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.
Judgement/order signed by P.O on
Judgement/order uploaded on
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Gopal N. Sutar
HHJ Shri A. C. Daga(CR No.23)
13/04/2022
13/04/2022
13/04/2022