Kaveri w/o Vijay Daspute v. The State of Maharashtra
Case Details
B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 1 :: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO.902 OF 2022 Kaveri w/o Vijay Daspute … APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra … RESPONDENT ....... Mr. M.R. Jadhav, Advocate for applicant Mr. N.T. Bhagat, A.P.P. for respondent – State, assisted by Mr. V.M. Mote, Advocate for original complainant ....… WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.953 OF 2022 Ganesh s/o Ashok Ubhedal … APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra … RESPONDENT ....... Mr. N.S. Ghanekar, Advocate for applicant Mr. N.T. Bhagat, A.P.P. for respondent – State, assisted by Mr. V.M. Mote, Advocate for original complainant ....… WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.1092 OF 2022 Navnath s/o Sheshrao Gardhe … APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra … RESPONDENT B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 2 :: .......
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Vishal Bagal, Advocate holding for Mr. R.U. Bhutekar, Advocate for applicant Mr. N.T. Bhagat, A.P.P. for respondent – State ....… WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2471 OF 2022 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.1092 OF 2022 Sachin Ghayal Sugar Pvt. Ltd. Sanchlit Shree Sant Eknath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. … APPLICANT VERSUS Navnath s/o Sheshrao Gardhe & anr. … RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. K.N. Shermale, Advocate for applicant Mr. Vishal Bagal, Advocate holding for Mr. R.U. Bhutekar, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. N.T. Bhagat, A.P.P. for respondent 2 – State ....… WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.1032 OF 2022 Babasaheb s/o Baban Galdhar … APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra … RESPONDENT ....... Mr. A.L. Muley, Advocate with Mr. R.N. Chavan, Advocate for applicant Mr. N.T. Bhagat, A.P.P. for respondent – State, assisted by Mr. U.S. Mote, Advocate for original complainant ....… WITH B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 3 :: CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2361 OF 2022 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.1032 OF 2022 Sachin Ghayal Sugar Pvt. Ltd. Sanchlit Shree Sant Eknath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. … APPLICANT VERSUS Babasaheb Baban Galdhar & anr. … RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. V.M. Mote, Advocate for applicant Mr. A.L. Muley, Advocate with Mr. R.N. Chavan, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. N.T. Bhagat, A.P.P. for respondent 2 – State ....… CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT, J. DATE : 5th AUGUST, 2022. O R D E R : Criminal Application Nos.2361/2022 and 2471/2022 are allowed. The original complainant is permitted to assist learned A.P.P. 2. Heard. All these four applications have been filed for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No.0119/2022, registered at M.I.D.C. Paithan Police Station, B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 4 :: District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 464, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The F.I.R. has been lodged by one Sachin Vikramrao Ghayal for and on behalf of Shri Sant Eknath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Paithan, District Aurangabad. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that, he (Sachin Ghayal) is operating the said sugar factory on contract. Shri Namdeo Tattoo (co- accused) has been serving with the sugar factory as a “Slip Boy”. Namdeo has entered into a contract with the sugar factory for supply of his two bullock carts and a tractor for harvesting and transportation of sugarcane. The nature of job of a Slip Boy is – to take entry in respect of particular Gut number of land. The farmers who have enrolled themselves with the sugar factory for supply of their sugarcane for crushing are to be provided with labourers for sugarcane harvesting and vehicle for transportation of the harvested sugarcane. The farmers are to be provided with this service serially i.e. as per their turn. An App was developed therefor. The information therein was required to be filled in/ uploaded by the Slip Boy himself. On filling in such information, token number is generated. The token number is to be issued to B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 5 :: the concerned Driver of the vehicle meant for transporting sugarcane or bullock cart rider. One token number is issued to a transporter. The sugarcane brought to the sugar factory is first weighed on Weigh Bridge. The weight of the sugarcane is recorded in the name of the concerned farmer. A bill as per FRP rate is prepared and the amount thereof is credited to the Bank Account of the concerned farmer/ sugarcane supplier. 4. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that, during inspection of the sugar factory and data on the Software/ App, it was noticed that, there were four weighing machines. Two of them meant for bullock carts. Capacity of one of the weighing machines is of 50 Tons. The same is used for vehicles like truck and tractor. One of the weighing machines was not in operation. It was found that, when on the weighing machine of 50 Tons capacity no bullock cart loaded with sugarcane is weighed, it was shown that the bullock cart with sugarcane therein was weighed in the name of applicant Kaveri Daspute. A bill has also been prepared in her name. CCTV cameras have been installed in the sugar factory premises. The informant suspected something amiss. He, therefore, inspected weigh slips, bills and the CCTV footage of the B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 6 :: concerned days orally. It was found that on these days, no bullock cart with sugarcane therein had been to the sugar factory. The informant was shocked. It was then realized that, accused No.1 Namdeo was misusing the Mobile App. It was further found that, Namdeo had registered names of some persons who even did not hold agricultural lands. He showed the sugarcane to have been received in the name of such persons, false and fabricated papers were generated therefor. False weighing slips, bills were prepared. Most of such farmers were the relations of accused Namdeo Tattoo. Co-accused Vijay Daspute has been serving with the sugar factory as operator of weighing machine. One Ramdas Ghodke (co-accused) has also been serving with the sugar factory. All these three had conspired together. They made the sugar factory pay bill for sugarcane not in fact received. The details of the payments are as under :- (1) Kaveri Vijay Daspute (Applicant in Bail Application No.902/2022) is shown to be the owner of land Gut No.25/2. The said land in fact stands in the name of some other person. 50 Tons of sugarcane was shown to have been received in her name. A bill therefor was generated. Amount has been B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 7 :: transferred to her Account. The applicant Kaveri is none other than the wife of Weighing Machine Operator Vijay (co-accused). (2) Ganesh Ashok Ubhedal (Applicant in Bail Application No.953/2022) :- Land Gut No.658 is said to have been standing in the name of applicant Ganesh at Saygaon. In fact, there is no land of such number within the limits of Saygaon, Taluka Paithan, District Aurangabad. It is shown that, the sugarcane of 236.867 Tons was received in the name of applicant Ganesh on 16th January and 7th March. Since applicant Ganesh did not hold any agricultural land, there was no question of he registering his sugarcane with the sugar factory and sending it for crushing. A sum of Rs.6,51,621/- is transferred to the Account of this applicant Ganesh. (3) Babasaheb Baban Galdhar (applicant in Bail Application No.1032/2022) :- The same way 159 Tons of sugarcane was shown to have been received in the name of applicant Balasaheb while in fact only 75 Tons of sugarcane was received in his name. By B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 8 :: fabricating false documents, a sum of Rs.2,87,501/- was transmitted to the Account of this applicant/ accused. (4) Navnath Sheshrao Gardhe (applicant in Bail Application No.1092/2022) :- In the similar way, a sugarcane worth Rs.7,69,220/- was shown to have been received from applicant Navnath. That much amount was, therefore, credited to his Bank Account. 5. In the F.I.R., there are further details in respect of co-accused. Those are not referred to since they are not before this Court. 6. Shri M.R. Jadhav, learned counsel for the applicant in Bail Application No.902/2022 would submit that, the applicant is a housewife. She had never been to the sugar factory. She is sought to be vicariously made liable for criminal act of her husband. It is only a sum of Rs.9600/- received in her Bank Account. She is unaware thereof. Her husband has been serving with the sugar factory. The applicant is a female. He, therefore, urged for grant of bail. B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 9 :: 7. The learned counsel Mr. Ghanekar for applicant in Bail Application No.953/2022 would submit that, the applicant is ready to payback amount of Rs.2,37,000/-. The applicant is a medical practitioner. He has been behind the bars for little over one and a half month. 8. Learned counsel Mr. Bhutekar for the applicant in Bail Application No.1092/2022 would submit that, the applicant Navnath has paid back the amount received. Same has been the submission made by learned counsel Mr. Muley for applicant in Bail Application No.1032/2022. 9. Mr. Shermale, learned counsel for the informant – sugar factory would submit that, it is an economic offence. A magnitude thereof is of more than Rs.1 Crore. If the applicants herein are granted bail, the co-accused may come with the claim for parity. It is in fact a syndicate. The applicants and co-accused were in league. Most of the applicants are the relations of accused Namdeo Tattoo. The transaction that came to the light pertains to the current year. Namdeo, Vijay and Ramdas have been serving with the sugar factory for long. An audit of the past transactions is B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 10 :: underway. The present applicants and these three must have duped the sugar factory the same way in the past. According to learned counsel, even if one of the applicants is female, she is not entitled for bail only because of her gender. He relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in case of State of Tamil Nadu Vs. R. Vasanthi Stanley & anr. [ (2016) 1 SCC 376 ]. According to him, the amount received by the present applicant was only towards the bill of the sugarcane not received by the sugar factory. The sugar factory had to pay towards incidental charges, such as sugarcane harvesting and transporting the same. If the said amount is considered, it would be in multiples of what has been in fact shown to have been received by the applicants herein. 10. The investigating officer was present before the Court. The learned A.P.P. and the investigating officer would submit that, the amount shown as against the names of the present applicants only appears to have been received by them. The amounts from some of the applicants have been recovered. They too would urge for rejection of the bail applications. 11. Considered the submissions advanced. Perused B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 11 :: the F.I.R. and the police papers so far made. 12. The applicant Kaveri is a woman. She is wife of Weighing Machine Operator Vijay Daspute. She is not in employment with the sugar factory. It appears that, everything has been done by her husband Vijay in her name. A sum of Rs.10,000/- is said to have been received by her. She is also ready to deposit that much amount. 13. The judgment of the Apex Court in R. Vasanthi’s case (supra) would be of no assistance to the learned counsel for the original complainant/ intervener since the same pertains to quashing of proceedings, since the Apex Court has observed that, discharge or acquittal on the ground of gender is untenable. 14. Applicant Ganesh Ubhedal offered to deposit a sum of Rs.2,37,000/-, shown to have been received by him. It is true that, this applicant did not hold any agricultural land. He is a medical practitioner. The investigating officer and the learned A.P.P. would, however, submit that, his monetary liability is only to the extent of that much amount. When this applicant has on his own offered to deposit that much amount B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 12 :: and he having been behind the bars since 24/5/2022, his application deserves to be allowed. 15. Applicant Navnath Gardhe has deposited the amount of Rs.7,69,260/-. He has been behind the bars since 3/6/2022. 16. It is informed that, the investigating officer has recovered amount of Rs.2,87,501/- from the applicant Babasaheb Galdhar (applicant in Bail Application No.1032/2022). He is behind the bars since 8/6/2022. His liability is said to be not more than that much amount. 17. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the applicants on certain conditions. Hence the order :-
Decision
O R D E R (i) Bail Application No.902/2022 is allowed. On condition of the applicant depositing amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with the trial Court, the applicant be released on bail in connection with Crime No.0119/2022, registered at M.I.D.C. Paithan Police Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 13 :: 409, 420, 464, 468, 470, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on her executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (ii) Bail Application No.953/2022 is allowed. On condition of the applicant depositing amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) with the trial Court, the applicant be released on bail in connection with Crime No.0119/2022, registered at M.I.D.C. Paithan Police Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 464, 468, 470, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on his executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (iii) Bail Application No.1092/2022 is allowed. The applicant be released on bail in connection with Crime No.0119/2022, registered at M.I.D.C. Paithan Police Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 464, 468, 470, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on his executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) with one B.A. No.902/2022 with connected matters :: 14 :: solvent surety in the like amount. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (iv) Bail Application No.1032/2022 is allowed. The applicant be released on bail in connection with Crime No.0119/2022, registered at M.I.D.C. Paithan Police Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 464, 468, 470, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on his executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ( R. G. AVACHAT ) JUDGE fmp/-