High Court
Legal Reasoning
BA 189-2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADBAIL APPLICATION NO. 189 OF 2025WITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 919 OF 2025 IN BA/189/2025Bhausaheb Vitthal Gunjal,Age : 59 years, Occ. : Agriculture,R/o. : Maldad Road, Sangamner, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar ... APPLICANTVERSUSThe State of Maharashtra,Through Police Station Officer,Sangamner City Police Station,Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar ... RESPONDENT …Mr. Prakash B. Shirsath and Mr. Pravin D. Biradar – Advocates forApplicantMr. S.B. Narwade – APP for sole Respondent, StateMr. P.S. Koshti – Assit to P.P.…. CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. RESERVED ON : 25.03.2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 27.03.2025ORDER : 1.Instant application is for enlargement on regular bail onaccount of arrest of applicant in crime No. I 740 of 2023 registered atSangamner City Police Station, Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar forthe offence punishable under Section 420, 408, 409, 465, 467, 468,471, 477–A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3, 4and 5 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest Depositers (Financial1/7
Legal Reasoning
BA 189-2025Establishments) Act, 1999.2.Criminal Application No.919 of 2025 filed by informant forintervention seeking permission to assist the public prosecution isallowed.3.Pointing to the date of arrest of applicant i.e. 21.08.2023 it issubmitted that the applicant is behind bars since more than one andhalf years. That he is falsely implicated. He being working as aManager, was mere employee and was expected to follow thedirections from higher ups like Chairman, Vice Chairman and Boardof Directors. He pointed out that in all 21 persons are implicated andthat 7 amongst them are family members of mainaccused/Chairman. Learned Counsel submitted that applicantsucceeded earlier manager who resigned, and therefore he is notaware regarding previous transactions. It is pointed out that, initiallyhe was working Senior Clerk but because of above vacancy he waspromoted and given charge of Manager. Learned Counsel pointed outthat entire fraud/misappropriation is done by the Chairman andother Directors. Applicant is not involved in policy decision. LearnedCounsel pointed out that on receipt of notice from Co–operativeDepartment applicant gave detailed reply explaining his stand and2/7 BA 189-2025answering all queries raised to him. According to learned Counsel,only allegation against him is that there are some deposit slips inhis name and his wife’s name. There is no recovery of any cash at hisinstance. Now charge–sheet is filed and as such, no further recoveryor discovery is to be made and consequently he submits that furthercustody is unwarranted and hence, he seeks grant of bail on anycondition deemed fit by this Court. 4.Learned Counsel submitted that Hon’ble Apex Court in thecase of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra andAnother in Criminal Appeal No. 2787 of 2024 (arising out of SLP (Crl)No. 3809 of 2024) has expounded the purport of Article 21 of theConstitution of India and about right of speedy trial. He wouldsubmit that, applicant is behind bar since August–2023 andapparently, as trial is not yet commenced in this case, applicant’svaluable right of speedy trial is infringed. He further placed on recordorder of this Court in the case of Vasudev Suryavanshi Vs. The Stateof Maharashtra in Criminal Bail Application No. 4569 of 2024 andwould point out that, therein, elaborate discussion has been madewhile granting regular bail. For all above reasons learned Counsel urges for grant of bail.3/7 BA 189-20255.While opposing the bail application, learned A.P.P. pointed outthat huge fraud is committed by the Pat Sanstha in which presentapplicant was working as Manager. According to learned A.P.P.,applicant was involved in day to day transactions and was custodianof huge deposits of various people. He pointed that investigationrevealed that applicant indulged in causing forgery, creating bogusdeposit slips and fixed deposits worth crores of rupees. That, he isalso signatory of agreement and caused signatures on R.T.G.S. slipsand as such, he is also found involved in said fraud. Learned A.P.P.found that numerous deposit slips are recovered from him whichstood in his name as well as his wife’s name. Lastly, learned A.P.P.pointed out that he is hand in glove with other accused. LearnedA.P.P. has also invited attention of this Court to the detailed orderpassed in Bail Application No. 2120 of 2024 by which relief of bail toChairman was rejected. 6.Learned Counsel, who is allowed to assist A.P.P., also opposedon above grounds.7.Heard. Perused the papers. Law was set into motion on19.08.2023 by one Rajendra Fakira Nikam a Special Auditor, Co–operative Department, alleging that while conducting audit of4/7 BA 189-2025Dudhganga Nagari Sanstha Maryadit, Sangamer for a period from01.04.2016 to 31.03.2021 he noticed several irregularities andmisappropriation committed by 21 persons who were part and parcelof the above Pat Sanstha. Details of the irregularities are reflectedand encapsulated in 13 points and ultimately, economic fraud to thetune of Rs.89,79,41,981/- is allegedly committed. There areallegations of huge withdrawals, without following procedures andwithout maintaining record. There are overdraft, deposits aremisdirected for personal gains and benefits. The Chairman, Directorsand Managers are said to be involved in all above illegal sanctions,approvals, loans disbursements by showing utter disregard to therules and regulations. Loans are shown to be disbursed withoutauthorisation/sanction to near and dear ones of accused persons.Applicant is shown as accused No. 2 i.e. right after main accusedChairman – Bhausaheb Damodhar Kute, whose application isalready rejected by this Court by order dated 12.02.2025. 8.Learned A.P.P. invited attention of the Court to the summary ofcharges and allegations against the accused. On going through thesummary (page No.61), amongst the 13 distinct heads, applicant isshown to be alongwith main accused – Kute in almost all the items. 5/7 BA 189-20259.Learned Counsel has laid much emphasis on the judgment ofHon’ble Apex Court in the case of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh (supra),and order of this Court in Bail Application No. 4569 of 2024 VasudevSuryavanshi (supra) decided by this Court at Principal seat. In thatbail application crime was registered for offence punishable underSection 120B, 109, 302, 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Codeand under provisions of Arms Act. However, in the said proceeding,applicant was shown to be behind bars for more than six years andtaking note of 130 witnesses proposed to be examined by theprosecution, bail was granted. 10.Here, facts are distinct. This Court had rejected BailApplication No.2120 of 2024 filed by the Chairman, and presentapplicant is found to be involved in all alleged irregularities andillegalities in which Chairman is also shown to be involved and hisapplication has been rejected. While rejecting Chairman's bailapplication, this Court had reproduced the observations of Hon’bleApex Court in the case of Tarun Kumar Vs. Assistant Director,Directorate of Enforcement reported in AIR 2024 SC (Criminal) 217and also taking into consideration magnanimity of economic fraud,relief to the Chairman was refused. As stated above, name of presentapplicant is reflected under all heads alongwith Chairman. Therefore,6/7
Decision
BA 189-2025he too does not deserve relief as prayed. 11.Resultantly, in view of the above discussion, this Court is notinclined to grant relief as prayed for. Hence, following order :ORDERThe application is rejected.[ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. ]Pooja Kale7/7