Mohan Arjun Keswani v. The State Of Maharashtra

2.IAST.1455.2020 in Cr.APEAL.489.2020.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 1455 OF 2020 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 489 OF 2020 Mohan Arjun Keswani ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

*** Mr. Sayaji Dadu Nangre, for the Applicant.

Mr. A.R. Patil, APP, for the Respondent - State. *** CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & V.G. BISHT, JJ.

DATE : DECEMBER 22, 2020.

PER COURT :

1.

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicant. 2.

This is an application with a prayer to grant bail to the Applicant pending hearing and final disposal of the appeal and in the appeal applicant prayed for suspension of sentence.

3.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant vehemently submitted that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence in proper perspective and arrived at an erroneous conclusion. It is also the Umesh Malani

2.IAST.1455.2020 in Cr.APEAL.489.2020.doc submission of learned Counsel for Applicant that the applicant was not director of the said company and he was falsely involved in the said crime. 4.

Per contra, learned APP vehemently submitted that even though it may be a case of less number of witnesses against the accused persons but these witnesses stood firm before the Court and testimoney of these witnesses was unshaken.

5.

Perusal of the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court further shows that present Applicant actively participated in certain workshops at the instance of said company and in those workshops a rosy picture of the company was painted so as to lure the depositors and these workshops were conducted in more than one places. In so far as the submissions of learned Counsel that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence in its proper perspective, this submissions relates to scrutinizing and assessing the evidence in depth. Certainly at this stage such an exercise would not be possible for this Court.

6.

Considering the prima facie material against the applicant, we are of the opinion that the application is devoid of merit as such deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, interim application is rejected. ( V.G. BISHT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) Umesh Malani