Bombay High Court
Durwang Uday Sawant vs The State Of Maharashtra on 23 July, 2021
Author: Prakash D. Naik
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal, Prakash D. Naik
28-ABA-1536-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1536 OF 2021
Durwang Uday Sawant .... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
______
Mr. Gaurav Parkar, for the applicant.
Mr. S.S. Pednekar, APP for the State/Respondent.
______
CORAM :SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 23rd JULY, 2021
P.C. :
1. The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in
connection with C.R.No. 383 of 2021 registered at Malad
Police Station, Mumbai, under sections 43(b) and 72 of
the Information Technology Act as well as under section
408 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard Mr. Gaurav Parkar, learned counsel for
the applicant and Mr. S.S. Pednekar, learned APP for the
State.
y.s.patil 1 of 4
::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2021 20:25:07 :::
28-ABA-1536-2021.odt
3. The FIR is lodged by one Prashant Ubale who
was working with Tata Financial Services Limited. He has
stated that his company was providing diferent fnancial
services to their customers. For that purpose, a special
Sales department is working. On 15/05/2018, the
present applicant was appointed as Sales Manager. His
office was at Malad (Wesest). In October 2020, he was
promoted in his job. Therefore he was given more
responsibilities and he had access to confdential
information of the Company and also to the key decisions
of the company. In December 2020, senior officers of the
company came to know that the applicant had sent
important data of the company on his private email
address. The data was used by the company's old
employee and by earlier Manager of the applicant Chintan
Panchamtiya. Allegedly the applicant had sent that data
to help them in their private business. The FIR mentions
that the applicant accepted that he had sent the data
since December 2020. The applicant was dismissed from
his job. As the informant's company was holding
y.s.patil 2 of 4
::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2021 20:25:07 :::
28-ABA-1536-2021.odt
suspicion that the applicant and Chintan Panchamtiya had
caused loss to the company, the FIR was lodged.
4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted
that the allegations are vague. He submitted that
Section 408 of the IPC was not initially applied but it was
applied subsequently only to make it a non bailable
ofence.
5. Learned APP submitted that after the previous
interim protection order was passed by this Court
(Coram:- Prakash D. Naik, J.), the applicant had attended
the police station and has co-operated with the
investigation. Copy of the say dated 23/07/2021 given by
the investigating agency to the learned APP is taken on
record and marked "X" for identifcation.
6. I have considered these submissions. The
allegations in the FIR are vague. No specifc details are
given as to what exact data was misused by the present
y.s.patil 3 of 4
::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2021 20:25:07 :::
28-ABA-1536-2021.odt
applicant. Approximate loss is also not quantifed. It
appears that there was some dispute regarding his
service and he was terminated from his service. Learned
Counsel for the applicant submitted that this FIR was
lodged after termination of the applicant from his job. In
this view of the matter, custodial interrogation of the
applicant is not necessary.
7. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R. No. 383 of 2021 registered with Malad Police Station, Mumbai, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
y.s.patil 4 of 4
::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2021 20:25:07 :::