High Court

Legal Reasoning

2050.24APPLN-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 905 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2050 OF 2024 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.856 OF 2024AMIT VALLABARAY PANDITVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA...Advocate for Applicant : Adv.Abad Ponda, Senior Advocate, a/w.Adv.Nilesh Tribhuwan, a/w. Adv.Burzin Bharucha i/b.Adv.K.M.MoreAPP for Respondent-State : Adv.A.R.Kale ….. CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. (VACATION COURT) DATED : 22nd MAY, 2024. PER COURT :- 1]This is an application for granting temporary bail.2]The learned counsel for the applicant submitted thatthe applicant is suffering from Haemophilia. The learned Advocatefor the applicant further submitted that the applicant has filed anaffidavit that he is ready to deposit entire amount as per thedecision of Debt Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad. Para nos.2 to 5 ofthe said affidavit reads as under:2.I say that after the said the Applicantgot a benefit from the Hon’ble DRT by order dated30 June 2023 and 15 June, 2023. Under the saidorders, the amount of Rs.16,00,00,000/- was 2050.24APPLN-2- reduced to Rs.13,64,33,047/- by virtue of thefact that an amount of Rs.1,50,81,773/- andRs.20,00,000/- and Rs.64,85,180/- had to bededucted for earlier payments made which was dulyrecorded in the order dated 15 June, 2023.3.I say that hence the outstanding duestherefore was reduced to Rs.13,64,33,047/-. Ifurther say that I paid Rs.1,60,00,000/- on 13July, 2023 and Rs.40,00,000/- on 20 July, 2023,both within the stipulated time period as per theorder of the Hon’ble DRT dated 15 June, 2023. Ifurther say that I paid Rs.50,00,000/- on 4September, 2023 and Rs.50,00,000/- on 27 October,2023. Hence I owe Rs.10,64,33,047/- which is thefigure that has arrived after the above mentionedcalculations.4.I hereby undertake to pay an amount ofRs.2,00,00,000/- within 15 days of my release andfurther undertake to pay the balance amount ofRs.8,64,33,047/- post the expiry of 15 dayswithin a period 3 months’ time after the expiryof the 15 days period as mentioned above.5.I say that on my failure to comply witheither of the above undertakings to pay in thestipulated periods, I will not seek any furtherextension of time and surrender before theconcerned court. The above offer is made only toshow my bonafides and without admitting my guiltin any manner and without prejudice to my rightsand contentions in further proceedings as well asin the trial. 3]The learned counsel for the applicant further submittedthat as per the aforesaid affidavit, the applicant is ready to pay theamount concluded by DRT, which is mentioned in the affidavitwithin time frame. He relied upon the judgment in the case ofRamesh Kumar Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi in Criminal appeal 2050.24APPLN-3- [arising out of SLP (Cri.) No.2358 of 2023] decided on July 04,2023 in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para no.26 of itobserved as under : 26.…… We may, however, not be understood tohave laid down the law that in no case shouldwillingness to make payment/deposit by theaccused be considered before grant of an orderfor bail. In exceptional cases such as where anallegation of misappropriation of public money bythe accused is levelled and the accused whileseeking indulgence of the court to have hisliberty secured/restored volunteers to accountfor the whole or any part of the public moneyallegedly misappropriated by him, it would beopen to the concerned court to consider whetherin the larger public interest the moneymisappropriated should be allowed to be depositedbefore the application for anticipatory bail/bailis taken up for final consideration. After all,no court should be averse to putting public moneyback in the system if the situation is conducivetherefor. We are minded to think that thisapproach would be in the larger interest of thecommunity. However, such an approach would not bewarranted in cases of private disputes whereprivate parties complain of their money beinginvolved in the offence of cheating. He further relied upon the judgment in the case ofInderjit Singh Grewal Vs. State of Punjab and another reported in[2011] 12 SCC 588 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in 2050.24APPLN-4- para no.17 and 18 as under : 17.It is a settled legal proposition that wherea person gets an order/office by makingmisrepresentation or playing fraud upon thecompetent authority, such order cannot besustained in the eye of the law as fraud unravelseverything. “Equity is always known to defend thelaw from crafty evasions and new subtletiesinvented to evade law.” It is trite that “fraudand justice never dwell together” (fraus et jusnunquam cohabitant). Fraud is an act ofdeliberate deception with a design to securesomething, which is otherwise not due. Fraud anddeception are synonymous. “Fraud is anathema toall equitable principles and any affair taintedwith fraud cannot be perpetuated or saved by theapplication of any equitable doctrine.” An act offraud on court is always viewed seriously. (videMeghmala v. G.Narasimha Reddy, SCC pp. 395-96,para 34). 18.However, the question does arise as towhether it is permissible for a party to treatthe judgment and order as null and void withoutgetting it set aside from the competent court.The issue is no more res integra and standssettled by a catena of decision of this Court.For setting aside such an order, even if void,the party has to approach the appropriate forum.[Vide State of Kerala v. M.K.Kunhikannan NambiarManjeri Manikoth and Tayabbhai M.Bagasarwalla v.Hind Rubber Industries (P) Ltd.] The learned counsel for the applicant lastly prayed togrant temporary bail considering bonafides of this applicant. 4]The learned A.P.P. for the respondent-State hasstrongly opposed the application and submitted that there isforensic audit report which shows that the applicant has 2050.24APPLN-5- misappropriated huge amount of Rs.36 crores. The investigation isin progress. The trial Court has rightly rejected the bail applicationof the applicant. The applicant may misuse the liberty allowed. Theapplicant can be treated in the Civil Hospital. Lastly, the learnedAPP prayed to reject the application. 5]Perused the charge sheet particularly report and otherdocuments. The public money is involved in this litigation andwould certainly cause hurdle to the interest of public. The applicantis ready to deposit amount of Rs.2,00,00,000/- within 15 days ofhis release on bail. He undertakes to pay the balance amount ofRs.8,64,33,047/- post expiry of 15 days within a period of 3months’ or earlier to that. 6]To raise money to pay that amount applicant must notbe behind bar. Considering the bonafides offered on the part of theapplicant, it would be appropriate to release the applicant on bailfor three months as prayed in para no.4 of the affidavit filed by theapplicant in the interest of public money. If the applicant fails todeposit that amount of Rs.2,00,00,000/- within 15 days, therespondents may proceed further for cancellation of bail granted tothe present applicant. 2050.24APPLN-6- 7]Considering all these aspects, Criminal ApplicationNo.2050 of 2024 deserves to be allowed. Hence, the followingorder : O R D E RI.Application is allowed.II.The applicant in connection with crime No.0121 of 2022registered with Kotwali Police Station, District Ahmednagar,for the offences punishable under Section 420, 409, 467,468, 471 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, be released ontemporary bail of three months on furnishing personal bondof Rs.1 lac with one surety of the like amount on followingconditions:- a)The applicant shall deposit in the concerned Bank anamount of Rs.2,00,00,000/- within 15 days of hisrelease on bail and also deposit remaining amount ofRs.8,64,33,047/- post expiry of 15 days within a periodof 3 months’ or earlier to that. b)The applicant to surrender passport and he shall notleave the country without permission of the trial Court.c)If the Investigating Officer require the presence of theapplicant for investigation, he may communicate himin writing and secure the presence of the applicant and 2050.24APPLN-7- the applicant shall attend the concerned Police Stationand shall submit his Email ID and residential address tothe concerned Police Station as soon as he is releasedon bail. d)The applicant shall submit details of his assets beforethe Investigating Officer. e)The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecutionevidence and shall not pressurize the witnesses, in anymanner. f)If any breach of the above conditions are noticed by thetrial court or the prosecution, the trial court is at libertyto cancel the bail of the applicant without reference tothis Court. III.Criminal Application No.2050 of 2024 is disposed ofaccordingly. IV.Hamdust permitted.V.Parties to act upon authenticated copy of this order. VI.List Bail Application No.856 of 2024 on 26.08.2024. (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)DDC