Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Biddut Shailendranath Bishwas vs The State Of Maharashtra on 28 September, 2020

Author: C.V. Bhadang

Bench: C.V. Bhadang

                                                           4 BA 384-20=



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

               CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 384 OF 2020


 Biddut Shailendra Bishwas                      ..Applicant
      V/s.

 State of Maharashtra                           ..Respondent
                                 ----
 Mr. Ritesh Thobde for the Applicant

 Mr. Ajay Patil, APP for the Respondent-State.
                                  ----
                               CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J.

                               DATE : 28th September 2020
                               (Through Video Conference)

 P.C.


 1.        The Applicant is facing prosecution under Section 420, 406

 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. in R.C.C. No. 659 of 2019 pending

 before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Pandharpur,

 District-Solapur. The said case arises out of Crime No. 1392 of 2019

 registered with Pandharpur City Police Station. The said offence

 was registered on the basis of a complaint by one Mangesh Magar.



 2.         The gravamen of the allegations against the Applicant is that

 on the representation and pretext of giving a dealership/supply of



        Sneha Chavan                                                 page 1 of 6



::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2020                   ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2020 03:06:23 :::
                                                            4 BA 384-20=


 electric two wheelers, the Applicant had accepted an amount of Rs.

 16,50,000/-from the complainant and thereafter, had failed to

 supply the vehicles.



 3.       I have heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant and the

 learned A.P.P. Perused record.



 4.       It transpired during the course of hearing that, apart from the

 present complaint, there were two similar complaints lodged against

 the Applicant by different complainants. It further appears that in

 one of the offences namely, Crime No. 389 of 2019 of Police Station

 Akluj, the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Malshiraj had

 granted bail to the Applicant vide order dated 10.10.2019 in

 Criminal Bail Application No. 279 of 2019. It was undisputed that

 in the second complaint, the Applicant has been released on default

 bail.



 5.        In the present complaint, there is a reference to the Applicant

 having accepted an amount of Rs. 11 lakhs from one Prathmesh Gia

 and Rs.14 lakhs from one Mr. Bankar.            Insofar as the present

 complaint is concerned, an amount of Rs.15,50,000/- has been

 transferred to the account of Applicant and the Complainant claims

      Sneha Chavan                                                   page 2 of 6



::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2020                   ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2020 03:06:23 :::
                                                                  4 BA 384-20=


 that Rs.1,00,000/- was paid in cash. Be that as it may, the total

 amount which the complainant along with Prathmesh and Mr.

 Bankar is alleged to have paid is to the extent of approximately

 Rs.32 lakhs.



 6.       The learned Counsel for the Applicant, on instructions,

 submitted that there is no prima facie case of the Applicant having

 cheated the complainant or others. He pointed out that there are

 several entries in the bank account of Applicant, which would show

 that the Applicant had paid various amounts to the suppliers of the

 spare parts/ components of the electric vehicles. He pointed out

 that the Applicant was only assembling the parts of the vehicles. He

 pointed       out     that    for   various   reasons,   the     supply        of   the

 components/spare parts did not materialize and that is the reason

 why the Applicant could not supply the vehicles. It is submitted that

 in any event, it is not shown that since inception, the Applicant had

 no intention to honour the commitment. In this regard, the learned

 Counsel has pointed out that the Applicant has supplied vehicles

 worth of Rs.7.5 lakhs to Mr. Bankar, which would indicate, that the

 Applicant, was making all the efforts to honour the commitment. It

 is submitted that it is a commercial transaction without any criminal

 overtones.

      Sneha Chavan                                                         page 3 of 6



::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2020                         ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2020 03:06:23 :::
                                                            4 BA 384-20=


 7.       The learned Counsel for the Applicant on instructions

 submitted that the Applicant is ready and willing to deposit amount

 as may be directed by this Court to show his bonafides.



 8.       The learned A.P.P. has opposed the application. It is submitted

 that the Applicant has practiced similar deception, in respect of

 other complainants also. The Applicant is a native of Orissa and he

 is carrying on business from Nagpur. The learned A.P.P. points out

 that the Applicant was arrested from Orissa and in the event, he is

 released on bail, he may not be available for trial.



 9.       I have carefully considered the circumstances and the

 submissions mde. As noticed earlier in two other complaints, the

 Applicant has been released on bail. In one of the cases pertaining

 to Police Station Akluj, he has been released on regular bail, while in

 the other, on default bail.      Insofar as the present complaint is

 concerned, the investigation is complete and the chargesheet is filed.

 The offences alleged are triable by the learned Magistrate.

 Furthermore, the Applicant has also expressed his willingness to

 deposit the amount, which he had received from the complainants

 and others to show his bonafides. Prima facie at this stage regard

 can be had to the submission on behalf of the Applicant that the

      Sneha Chavan                                                   page 4 of 6



::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2020                   ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2020 03:06:23 :::
                                                              4 BA 384-20=


 Applicant could not abide by the promise on account of the failure

 to get the supply of the spare parts/components or the vehicle. The

 apprehension expressed on behalf of the prosecution, to my mind,

 can be taken care of by imposing appropriate conditions.



 10.       In the result, the following order is passed:

                                     ORDER

i) The Applicant be released on bail on executing a PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties, in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each, out of which atleast one, surety shall be a local surety.

ii) The Applicant shall furnish his address at the native place as well as at Nagpur, along with proof, to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge.

iii) This shall be further subject to the condition that Applicant deposits a total amount of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rs. Thirty Lakhs only) before the learned Magistrate out of which Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs. five lakhs only) will be deposited within one week.

        Sneha Chavan                                                   page 5 of 6



::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2020                     ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2020 03:06:23 :::
                                                           4 BA 384-20=


 iv)       The Applicant shall be released only on deposit of the said

amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs. Five lakhs only).

v) The Applicant is granted six weeks' time to deposit the balance amount of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five lakhs only).

vi) The deposit of the amount shall be subject to further orders, that may be passed by the learned Magistrate, at the conclusion of the trial.

vii) The Applicant shall undertake to remain present before the learned Magistrate on the dates of hearing and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or witnesses.

viii) In the event of breach of any of the conditions, the bail is liable to be cancelled.

viii) Criminal bail application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

C.V. BHADANG, J.

        Sneha Chavan                                                page 6 of 6



::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2020                  ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2020 03:06:23 :::