Vikas S/O Apparao Kadam v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.6928 OF 2016 Vikas s/o Apparao Kadam ...
APPELLANT
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & anr.
...
RESPONDENTS .....
Shri R.V. Deshmukh, Advocate for applicant Shri S.P. Tiwari, A.P.P. for respondents .....
CORAM:
V.K. JADHAV, J.
DATED:
27th December, 2016.
(VACATION COURT) ORAL ORDER :
1.
The applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.0223/2016, registered with City Police Station, Udgir, District Latur for offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 109, 114, 188 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2.
Brief facts giving rise to this application are as follows:
On the basis of the complaint lodged by one Chandrakant Sadashiv Davne, Chief Manager of Bank of Maharashtra, Branch Udgir, District Latur, Crime No.0223/2016, for offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 109, 114, 188 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code came to be registered with City Police Station, Udgir, District Latur. It is alleged in the complaint that, in between 10/11/2016 to 17/11/2016, the present applicant and the other accused persons exchanged currency notes by accepting the old currency notes of the denomination of Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/-, by violating the directions and orders given by the Reserve Bank of India and thereby deceived the Government.
3.
The applicant has also approached the Sessions Court at Udgir and his application for similar prayer came to be rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Udgir, by order dated 3/12/2016 in Criminal Application No.179/2016. 4.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, the F.I.R. is filed belatedly and the applicant has no concern with the said allegations about the exchange of currency notes illegally.
The learned counsel submits that, due to political rivalry the applicant came to be falsely involved in this case. 5.
It appears from the contents of the complaint that there are serious allegations against the applicant. The applicant is a Bank employee and there is no question of political rivalry as such. This is not a case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. In the given set of allegations, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary though certain documents are available with the Bank about the exchange of those currency notes, violating thereby the specific directions given by the Reserve Bank of India in this regard. Hence the following order.
O R D E R
The application is hereby rejected.
( V.K. JADHAV, J. ) fmp/cri6928.16