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 16, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Akshay Hanuman Hande And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 September, 2021

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2021 BOM 4011

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

    1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1835 OF 2019

Ramdas Sonaji Shirke                                                         ... Applicant

              Versus
The State of Maharashtra                                                     ... Respondent

                               ALONG WITH
              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1836 OF 2019
Chaitanya Anil Kalyankar                                                     ... Applicant

              Versus

The State of Maharashtra                                                     ... Respondent

                              ALONG WITH
              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1839 OF 2019

1. Prakash Jayram Hande
2. Tanaji Balshiram Hande
3. Vikas Ramchandra Hande
4. Dattatraya Nathu Hande
5. Suryakant Manohar Hande
6. Balu Madhukar Dhavale
7. Haribhau Vaman Hande
8. Suresh Nana Gunjal
9. Tarabai Manohar Hande                                           ... Applicants
              Versus
The State of Maharashtra                                           ... Respondent

                              ALONG WITH
              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1861 OF 2019
                                  WITH
                  INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2122 OF 2021


Rekha Patil                                       1 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



1. Rahul Ramchandra Hande
2. Prabhakar Laxman Navale                                         ... Applicants

              Versus

The State of Maharashtra                                           ... Respondent
                              ALONG WITH
              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1935 OF 2019

Vedika Dayanand Hande                                              ... Applicant
              Versus
The State of Maharashtra                                           ... Respondent

                              ALONG WITH
              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1965 OF 2019
                                  WITH
                  INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2123 OF 2021

1. Akshay Hanuman Hande
2. Rishikesh Hanuman Hande
3. Asha Hanuman Hande                                              ... Applicants
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra                                           ... Respondent

                              .....
Mr. Niranjan Mundargi i/by Chaitanya B. Nikte a/w Ms. Sneha
Bhange, Advocate for the Applicants in ABA Nos. 1835 of 2019 &
1836 of 2019.
Mr. Aniket Nikam i/by Mr. Vivek N. Arote, Advocate for the
Applicant In ABA No.1839 of 2019.
Mr. Satyavrat Joshi i/by Mr. Sunil S. Kamble Advocate for the
Applicant in ABA No. 1861 of 2019.


Mr. Praful Soni, Advocate for the Applicant In ABA No.1935 of
2019.
Mr. Subir Sarkar, Advocate for the Applicant In ABA No.1965 of
2019.
Mr. Sharad T. Bhosale i/by Dilip Bodake, Advocate for the
Intervenor in both Interim Applications.

Rekha Patil                                       2 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



Mr. R. M. Pethe, APP for the Respondent - State.
                                                  .....
                                       CORAM              :        PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
                                       DATE               :        7th SEPTEMBER, 2021
PER COURT:


              The applicants in all these applications are apprehending

arrest in C.R. No. 90 of 2019 registered with Otur Police Station,

District-Pune. The offences were registered under Sections 406,

408, 409, 420, 463, 464, 465, 467, 468, 470, 471, 477A, 120B of

the Indian Penal Code r/w Sections 3 and 4 of MPID Act.



2             The First Information Report was registered on 11th June,

2019 by Aatmaram Aabu Mane, Special Auditor.



3             The case of the prosecution is that:

              The complainant is serving in Co-operative Department as

Special Auditor. He was authorized to conduct Governments Test

Audit of Mahalaxmi Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Patsanstha

Maryadit, Umraj No.1, Taluka-Junnar, Dist-Pune for the period of

01/04/2011 to 31/03/2017. He conducted Audit of the Society

and submitted the report dated 20/05/2019. While conducting the

Audit he found irregularities and misappropriation of funds. The

Commissioner directed the complainant to file criminal case.

Rekha Patil                                       3 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



Accordingly, the complaint was lodged against 33 persons. It is

alleged that the Chairman Hanuman Hande and Vice Chairman

Ramchandra Hande have misappropriated funds to the tune of

Rs.30,81,55,000/-               during        the     period        from       01/04/2011            to

31/03/2017 by making false and bogus proposal in the name of

members and remitting the said loan to the account of said

members. Certain loans were forwarded without any security to

the family members of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman. The

Chief Manager of the Society, namely, Sathyavan Belote, branch

Managers Sandip Hande, Manohar Shelke, Bhagvan Hande,

Ravindra Shinkote have deliberately omitted their duty and

wrongly entered the credit debit balance and created false balance

sheets, suppressing the true and correct financial position.

Statutory Auditors Mr. Paresh K. Shah, Chaitanya Kalyankar and

internal auditors- Avinash Navle and Ramdas Shirke did not

perform their duties and responsibilities and submitted incorrect

audit report.



4             The applicants have preferred applications for Anticipatory

Bail before the Sessions Court. The Applications were rejected by

the Sessions Court.




Rekha Patil                                       4 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



5             Interim protection was granted by this Court by order dated

22nd August, 2019 in ABA No. 1835 of 2019, ABA No. 1936 of 2019

and ABA No. 1839 of 2019. Interim protection was also granted in

ABA No. 1965 of 2019 by order dated 25th September, 2019.



6             Learned Advocate Mr. Niranjan Mundargi appeared in ABA

No. 1835 of 2019 and 1836 of 2019.                                It is submitted that the

applicant Ramdas Shirke is a internal auditor. He is a certified

auditor by profession.                  He has conducted several audits.                           His

experience is of 30 years. He is a reputed auditor. There is no

prima-facie case against him. He has categorically mentioned in

Audit Report and covering letter that the Society has failed to share

the balance sheets and financial statements with internal auditor.

The Audit Report was submitted as per available information. He

had pointed out the irregularities. He is not involved in alleged

fraud and misappropriation amount. He is not a beneficiary. There

is categorical mention of persons, who availed loan. In the Audit

Report he has specifically pointed out that it is incumbent on

Managing Committee to carry out compliance. The Report specifies

suggestions and remarks. The role of the applicant is of internal

auditor by which he serves at the instance of Managing Committee.

He pointed out the internal Audit Report dated 31/05/2015. It is

Rekha Patil                                       5 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



submitted that there were no lapses by the applicant. He is not

conspirator. The prosecution has filed Affidavit-in-reply which is at

page No. 64 of this Application. In the reply it is stated that in the

Minutes           of     the    Meeting          dated       10/06/2016,            08/05/2017,

26/09/2017 and 23/02/2018, it is observed that the President and

Vice President of the Patsanstha had admitted and confessed the

crime and committed to refund the amount.                                     The members of

Patsanstha             wrote      a     letter      to      the      Registrar         about        the

misappropriation. The applicant was internal auditor and aware of

modes-operendi of the accused. The applicant is accused no. 33.

He was appointed as an Auditor. The applicant did not object the

disbursement of loan which is more than limit. There was several

bogus loan proposals. Notices were issued to the borrowers. 95

borrowers were present.                    They denied outstanding loan.                         They

stated that they did not apply for loan. The applicant did not make

enquiry with such borrowers.                           Custodial interrogation of the

applicant is not necessary.



7             Mr. Mundargi, learned Advocate, on behalf of the applicant

in ABA No. 1836 of 2019 submitted that he is not involved in the

offences.              The applicant Chaitanya Kalyankar is a C.A. by

profession. He has conducted several audits. He was appointed as

Rekha Patil                                       6 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



internal auditor.               In the Audit Report of the year 2016-2017,

names of the persons who obtained loans were highlighted. The

Audit Report recourse to the loan sanctioned by Managing

Committee and Chairman of the Society. There is suggestions in

the Audit Report that Mr. Hanuman Hande has misappropriated the

funds from 2011 to 2017 and appropriate investigation should be

conducted against him and his accomplices.                                 The applicant had

immediately classified the Patsanstha "D" classified.                                              The

classification shows that the applicant has acted honestly and as

per guidelines. The investigation as a Special Auditor was directed

by Commissioner on the Audit Report submitted by the applicant.

The applicant is a vessel brows. He has been made an accused.

The Special Auditor/complainant has not considered that the

internal auditor and statutory auditors having collusion leads

nowhere as neither of the misappropriated of the funds. He has

not beneficiary. He has not involved in fabrication of documents.

He has not misappropriated the funds. The main accused were

arrested. The liability has been accepted by the other accused.



8             The prosecution has filed Affidavit-in-Reply opposing this

application. The reply is similar to the Affidavit-in-Reply filed in

ABA No. 1835 of 2019. In the reply it is alleged that the applicant

Rekha Patil                                       7 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



has defied a norms and Rules and By-Laws of Patsanstha. He did

not raised objections in the statutory audit. Custodial interrogation

of the applicant is necessary.                     The Patsanstha as per prevailing

norms were to be accredited in "D" class but it was given "A" class.



9             Learned Advocate Mr. Aniket Nikam appeared in ABA No.

1839 of 2019. He submitted that in the said application applicants

are not involved in the fraudulent activities. There are about 9

applicants in the said application. All of them are senior citizens.

In the Minutes of the Meeting dated 10/06/2016, 08/05/2017,

26/09/2017 and 23/02/2018, it is observed that the allegations

were levelled against the President and Vice President of the

Patsanstha.           The President Mr. Hanuman Hande admitted and

confessed that he is responsible for the fraud. On 12/09/2016, Mr.

Hanuman Hande and Akshay Hande executed an agreement with

other members of Patsanstha stating that Mr. Hanuman Hande

admitted that he took loan amount of Rs.17,17,57,920/- from

Patsanstha and agreed to refund the same. He has also stated that

he fails to refund the amount, the Patsanstha can take possession of

his properties. On 11/08/2017, Mr. Ramchandra Hande executed

an agreement with other members stating that he took the loan

amount from the Patsanstha.                        On 16/01/2019 the members of

Rekha Patil                                       8 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



Patsanstha wrote a letter to Additional Registrar Co-operative

Societies stating that the President and Vice President were

responsible for the fraud and misappropriation.                                  The applicants

themselves have deposits in the said Patsanstha. The applicants are

Directors of Credit Society.                   The applicants have not committed

crime. Their custodial interrogation is not necessary. They are

signatories to the complaint.                      An opportunity was given to the

Chairman. The applicants are not beneficiaries.



10            The prosecution has filed Affidavit-in-Reply opposing this

application. In the reply, it is alleged that for the purpose of filing

charge-sheet it is necessary to trace copy of undertaking dated

23/02/2019 executed by accused guaranteeing the repayment of

amount to depositors.                   It is necessary to find out whether the

Directors, Chief Executive Officers                               have hatched criminal

conspiracy           to      commit           offences.              Huge         amount           was

misappropriated.



11            Learned Advocate Mr. Satyavrat Joshi represented for

applicant in ABA No. 1861 of 2019. He submitted that loan of 34

crores was brought down.                          The application preferred by the

applicant no.1 Rahul Ramchandra Hande has been withdrawn vide

Rekha Patil                                       9 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



order dated 28/08/2019. The applicant no.2 was granted interim

protection by this Court vide order dated 28/08/2019.                                            It is

submitted that the applicant no.2 had never asked for any loan,

never signed any document asking for loan and never withdrawn

any amount sanctioned for loan by way of loan. He was never

called for investigation by police. Custodial interrogation is not

necessary.



12            Mr. Praful Soni, appeared for the applicant in ABA No. 1935

of 2019. He submitted that the applicant is a lady. Her custodial

interrogation is not necessary. She is not involved in the crime. No

specific role has been attributed to her. It is submitted that she was

appointed in ladies quota. She is a school teacher since 2009. No

positive overt act is attributed to her. There is no evidence against

her showing her involvement in misappropriation of funds. The

prosecution has filed reply opposing her application. It is alleged

that the applicant has abetted the commission of crime. The father-

in-law of the applicant had availed unsecured loan of Rs.25 lakhs

without giving security. The said loan was given in 2012. The

applicant acted in connivance with President and Vice President of

Patsanstha. The loans were disbursed without security.




Rekha Patil                                      10 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



13            Learned Advocate Mr. Subir Sarkar has represented the

applicant in ABA No. 1965 of 2019. He submitted that the custodial

interrogation of the applicant is not necessary.                             The entire matter

relates to documents. Investigation has proceeded. They have not

committed any offence.                    They are impleaded because they are

immediate family members of Accused no.1 and some of the

documents show that loans were disbursed against their names,

however, FIR itself reveals that the amounts were withdrawn in

cash from time to time and there are no corresponding entries. All

the applicants were made members of Patsanstha at the instance of

accused no.1. The loan accounts credit were in the names of the

applicants were also part of the report.                             95 persons had come

forward in pursuant to the notice dated 02/03/2019. They are

denying their involvement as beneficiaries. Certain amounts was

shown to have been repaid by the applicants. The amounts were

given on the instructions of Accused No.1. The applicant no.3 is

wife of Accused no.1.                     She is housewife.                 Applicant no.1 is

conducting business. They were not holding any posts. They have

no powers of decision making. The prosecution has filed Affidavit-

in-Reply opposing the application. In the Affidavit it is stated that

the applicant no.1 has availed unsecured loan. Applicant nos. 2

and 3 have also availed unsecured loan. Learned Counsel for the

Rekha Patil                                      11 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



applicants pointed out that avernments in para 4, 5 and 6 of the

Affidavit are contrary to the averment in para 14 of the Affidavit-in-

Reply. In para 14 it is stated that applicants are close relatives of

accused no.1.             He was President of Patsanstha.                         The loan was

availed by applicants for disbursed without security.                                     The loan

application form, loan agreement, promissory note is not executed

by the applicants and guarantors for the loan accounts. There was

no KYC compliance for the said loans. It is not necessary to find

out involvement of other accused.                           Thus, according to learned

Counsel for the applicants, the investigation has revealed that the

applicants were not signatories for any document utilized for loan.

Learned Counsel has tendered Additional Affidavit-in-Reply on

behalf of the applicants therein. In the said Affidavit he has stated

that the Audit Report entries suggesting repayment of monies to

the Patsanstha in lieu of loans availed was Rs. 23 lakhs were never

given as repayment of loan.                          The amount was given by the

applicants through Asha Infrastructure and his friend at the

instance of accused no.1. The amounts were to the current account

of the Patsanstha and not to any loan account. These amounts

were          thereafter       returned         to     Sujitkumar           Doke       and       Asha

Infrastructure. Further amount so given to the current account of

the Patsanstha were taken as loan from Mannapuram Finance

Rekha Patil                                      12 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



Company. On repayment of the money from accused no.1, the

amount was repaid to finance company.                                 The bank statement/

summary of accounts has been annexed to the Affidavit.



14            Learned APP submitted that he is relying upon the contents

of the Affidavit-in-Reply filed by the prosecution. He submitted

that the applicants in ABA No. 1835 of 2019 and ABA No.1836 of

2019 had failed in their duty. They were internal auditors. There

were lapses on their part. They did not verify bogus account

deliberately. They did not point out irregularities in their Report.

The applicants in ABA No. 1839 of 2019 had acted in connivance

with co-accused. Their complicity has been revealed during the

course of investigation. They were the Directors of the Patsanstha.

There were deliberate lapses on their part. The applicant no.2 in

ABA No. 1861 of 2019 has also played equal role. The evidence is

collected against him.                   He was party to the conspiracy.                           The

Applicant in ABA No. 1939 of 2019 has acted in connivance with

accused no.1 and accused no.2. She was one of the Director of the

Patsanstha. The applicant in ABA No. 1965 of 2019 is involved in

the crime. Loans were obtained in their name. The investigation

revealed his complicity. The applicant in all these applications were

conspirators. Their involvement is writ large.

Rekha Patil                                      13 of 15
     1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                       1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



15            Learned Counsel for the intervener has also opposed the

grant of Anticipatory Bail. He submitted that the fund belongs to

the members of the Society. It has been misappropriated by all the

accused.          All the accused have participated in the crime.                                  The

balance amount of loan which is yet to be cleared is Rs.90 crores.



16            I have perused the documents on record.                            The applicants

were granted interim protection in 2019. Investigation is going on

since long.           The prime role is attributed to Accused no.1 and

Accused no.2.             It is admitted by the prosecution that the main

accused had admitted his liability and assured of returning the

amount.           Apparently the amount has not been returned.                                     The

misappropriation was to the tune of Rs. 30 crores but subsequently

it has been reduced to Rs. 19 crores.                               I have considered the

submissions of both the sides. In the light of role attributed to the

applicants in all the applications, their custodial interrogation is not

necessary. It is alleged that they were conspirators. The allegations

are vague.           The auditors were attributed charge of conspiracy.

They have submitted the Report. It has not been established that

all these applicants are beneficiaries of the misappropriated

amount. It is not established that the amount misappropriated has

been credited into the personal account.                                  They need not be

Rekha Patil                                      14 of 15
                           1-Aba-1861-2019-With-Ia-2122-2021-With-Aba-1835-2019-With-Aba-1836-2019-With-Aba-1839-2019-With-Aba-
                                                                             1935-2019-With-Aba-1965-2019-With-Ia-2123-2021.doc



                      subjected to custodial interrogation. The investigation can proceed

                      without subjecting them to custody. Hence, relief under Section

                      438 of the Cr.P.C. can be granted to them. Hence, the following

                      order.

                                                                     ORDER

(i) Anticipatory Bail Application Nos. 1835 of 2019, 1836 of 2019, 1839 of 2019, 1861 of 2019, 1935 of 2019 & 1965 of 2019 are allowed;

(ii) Interim orders dated 22nd August, 2019, 28th August, 2019, 3rd September, 2019 and 6th September, 2019 are confirmed.

(iii) In the event of arrest of the applicants in connection with in C.R. No. 90 of 2019 registered with Otur Police Station, Dist. Pune the applicants be released on bail on furnishing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount;

(iv) The applicants shall attend the investigating officer on 20th, 21st, 22nd & 23rd September, 2021 between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 noon and thereafter as and when called for.

(v) Anticipatory Bail Applications are disposed of accordingly.

(vi) Interim Application Nos. 2122 of 2021 & 2123 of 2021 stand disposed of accordingly.


REKHA
PRAKASH
PATIL                                                                                    (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
Digitally signed by
REKHA PRAKASH
PATIL
Date: 2021.10.01      Rekha Patil                                      15 of 15
20:26:35 +0530