Bombay High Court
Satish @ Yatish Shahaji Jadhav vs The State Of Maharashtra on 11 September, 2019
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
903-BA 2265-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2265 OF 2019
Satish @ Yatish Shahaji Jadhav ...Applicant
Vs.
State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
• Mr. Ashok Mundargi, Senior Advocate alongwith Mr. Jitendra
Jain, Mr. Ranjit Sheety, Mr. Luckyraj Indorkar and Mr. Avina
Karnad, Advocate for the Applicant.
• Smt. J. S. Lohokare, APP for the State.
• Ms. Kavita Metkare, PSI, EOW, Pune City.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2019
P.C. :
1. The applicant is seeking his release on bail in connection
with CR No. 192/19 registered at Shivaji Nagar Police Station,
Pune for offences under Sections 420, 468, 471,409,467,474,477-
A, 120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC. The applicant is arrested
in connection with this offence on 11 th April 2019 and since then
he is in custody. The investigation is over and charge-sheet is
already filed.
2. The FIR is lodged on 15th March 2019 by Special Auditor
attached to the office of Registrar of the Co-operative Societies at
Nikita Gadgil 1/4
::: Uploaded on - 13/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 13/09/2019 21:14:47 :::
903-BA 2265-19.odt
Pune. He was conducting special audit in respect of Shivajirao
Bhosale co-operative Bank. During this audit, he came across a
loan transaction whereby two companies namely M/s Jabbal Auto
Private Limited and M/s Yapishika Engineering Private Limited,
controlled by one Harbanssingh Shingarsingh Jabbal, were
sanctioned loan to the tune of Rs. 3.75 Crores and Rs. 2 Crores
respectively. Harbanssingh was director in both these companies.
When the process of sanctioning these loans was scrutinized, it
was found that the loan amount of Rs. 3.75 Crores sanctioned in
the loan account of M/s Jabbal Auto Private Limited, was
transferred to Harbanssingh Jabbal's current account and from that
account, on 3rd October 2013 Rs. 1 Cr. were transferred to the
account in UCO Bank, Guruwar Peth branch. The amount was
further paid to Nikunj Steel Center and Saiyogi Enterprises. The
allegations are that, the bills submitted by Nikunj Steel Center and
Saiyogi Enterprises were forged. On this basis, the FIR is lodged.
3. In the charge-sheet, the allegations against the present
applicant are that he had obtained two PAN cards in two different
names i.e. Satish and Yatish. He had introduced one Jaswant Jain
Nikita Gadgil 2/4
::: Uploaded on - 13/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 13/09/2019 21:14:47 :::
903-BA 2265-19.odt
to the bank officers. This Jaswant Jain was proprietor of M/s
Nikunj Steel Center and Saiyogi Enterprises. The allegations
against the present applicant are that he had taken 7% commission
in the loan transaction mentioned herein above. The allegations
are that the applicant had accepted some amount from the accused
as well.
4. Heard, Mr. Mundargi, senior counsel for the applicant as
well as Ms. Lohokare, learned APP for the State.
5. Mr. Mundargi submitted that the main accused Harbanssing
Jabbal, in whose name the loans were sanctioned, is already
granted bail by this court, vide order dated 26th August 2019
passed in criminal bail application no. 2182/19. Mr. Mundargi
relied on the statement of business branch manager Sunita Bandal
and the audit report. He submitted that the loan account in the
name of Harbanssing's companies were closed much earlier to
filing of the FIR. The loan accounts were repaid with interest and
the bank had not suffered any losses. He, therefore, submitted that
since the main accused is granted bail, the present applicant also
deserves to be released on bail.
Nikita Gadgil 3/4
::: Uploaded on - 13/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 13/09/2019 21:14:47 :::
903-BA 2265-19.odt
6. Learned APP relied on the charge-sheet and the allegations
made against the applicant, which are discussed herein above. She
submitted that the applicant was instrumental in introducing one
Jaswant Jain to the bank officers. Therefore, his complicity in the
offence is obvious.
7. I have considered all these submissions. At this stage, it does
appear that loan amount was obtained by tendering forged bills.
However, the facts remains that the loan amount was repaid with
interest and the bank had not suffered losses. The guilt of the
accused can be decided during trial. The main accused
Harbanssingh, who was the beneficiary of those loans, is already
granted bail mainly on the ground that the loan amount was
repaid with interest, much prior to lodging of the FIR. The present
applicant had acted as an agent and had accepted the commission
from the bank and perhaps from the Harbanssingh himself. Thus,
though the offence is made out in the charge-sheet, the applicant's
further custody during the course of trial is not necessary. On the
ground of parity also, he deserves to be released on bail. The other
allegations of possession of two PAN cards does not pertain to
Nikita Gadgil 4/4
::: Uploaded on - 13/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 13/09/2019 21:14:47 :::
903-BA 2265-19.odt
sanction of loan to Harbanssingh. That is a separate subject
matter. Therefore, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant in
connection with the present offence. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
(i) The Applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.192/19 registered at Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Pune, on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(ii) Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Nikita Gadgil 5/4 ::: Uploaded on - 13/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 13/09/2019 21:14:47 :::