1
Cri BA No.49-2024
MHCC020003062024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.49 OF 2024
Deepak Prataprai Dani
] …Applicant.

Versus
The State of Maharashtra
]
(At the instance of Dadar Police Station Vide C.R. ]
No.192 of 2023)
] …Respondent.
Advocate Kapil Dave for applicant.
APP Pankaj Chavan for the State.
CORAM :
SHRI. S.B. PAWAR,
THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE (C.R. No.58)
DATE
:
25th JANUARY, 2024.
ORDER
The applicant, who is under detention in connection with
C.R. No.192 of 2023 registered with Dadar Police Station for offence
under sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, has filed the present application for regular bail under section
439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2.

As per the case of prosecution, the applicant alongwith co-
accused Rani Durairaj and Sonali Borse prepared forged LIC policy and
availed loan of Rs.30 lakhs from Punjab and
Sind Bank, Branch
Prabhadevi, Mumbai. It is alleged that the main accused Rani Durairaj
2
Cri BA No.49-2024
and Sonali Borse were acting as loan agents. They approached the
Bank Manager and after gaining his confidence, submitted LIC policies
of five co-accused, including the applicant.

Aggregate loan of
Rs.1,32,33,000/- was sanctioned and disbursed by the bank against the
said LIC policies. The borrowers failed to repay the loan. Therefore,
concerned bank manager verified about the policy documents
whereupon it was revealed that the policy documents were bogus. The
LIC policy No.886100283 purportedly issued in the name of applicant
was completely forged as no such policy was issued by LIC to any
person.

Accordingly, other policies were either forged or issued by
another branch of LIC to other persons or were lapsed policies.
Therefore, Mr. Raghav Shambunath Rajan, Bank Manager filed
complaint and on its basis FIR came to be registered on 21.04.2023.
3.

The applicant contends that he has not committed the
alleged offence
of
forgery.

He personally
never made any
representation to the bank for loan. The applicant was kept in dark by
the main accused Rani Durairaj in relation to the documents of loan.
His financial need is used by co-accused to take benefit of loan. They
hatched conspiracy, created forged documents and used them as
genuine for the purpose of loan.

The applicant received only
Rs.1,50,000/- and he has undertaken to repay the said amount to the
bank officer. He is not beneficiary of the proceeds of the crime as the
amount of loan is diverted in the account of main accused. He is infact
an aggrieved person. Investigation is complete. Therefore, he prays for
bail.
4.
grounds:
Prosecution filed reply and opposed the bail on following
3
1)
Applicant is named in the FIR.

Cri BA No.49-2024
He submitted his
Aadhaar Card, PAN Card and other documents for availing
loan and he was present in the bank for signing loan
documents.
2)
The applicant has transferred the amount of loan
credited in his account by RTGS to other bank accounts and
has received certain amount but has not produced the
same.
3)
The applicant is not residing on the address given by
him to the bank therefore, he has furnished false address to
the bank with intention to cheat the bank.
4)
After issuance of notice under section 41(A)(1) of
Cr.P.C., he was absconding and there is possibility that he
may flee from justice.
5)
The investigation against the other accused is going
on.
6)
Other offences bearing C.R. No.738 of 2022 for
offence under sections 419, 420, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471,
120B of IPC at Pant Nagar Police Station and C.R. No.23 of
2011 for offence under section 407, 34 of IPC at Hajira
Police Station, Surat, State Gujarat are registered against
the applicant.
7)
The applicant may help the other co-accused to
abscond.
5.

Heard learned Advocate Kapil Dave for the applicant,
learned APP Pankaj Chavan, for the State and investigating officer API
Chaduhary. Learned Advocate for applicant argued that applicant was
in financial need, he came in contact with main accused Rani Durairaj
4
Cri BA No.49-2024
and handed over his documents to her. He had received amount of
Rs.1,50,000/- which he repaid to the bank. He has not received the
remaining amount out of Rs.30 lakhs sanctioned by the bank. Main
accused Rani Durairaj is the kingpin of conspiracy and she is in custody.
She has forged more than 20 accounts by taking undue disadvantage of
financial need of the applicant and other persons. The offence of forgery
is not attracted against the applicant.

The charge-sheet does not
disclose the intention of the applicant to commit cheating since
inception. Therefore, he urged that the application be allowed.
6.

Per contra, learned APP submitted that applicant had
intention and knowledge of committing offence since beginning and he
was actively involved in the transaction of loan.

Huge amount of
Rs.1.32 crore is involved. Investigating Officer submits that the amount
of Rs.30 lakhs sanctioned by bank was transferred to bogus bank
account and the applicant was involved in transferring the said amount.
Other similar offences are registered against the applicant. Therefore,
both investigating officer and APP submitted that application be
rejected.
7.

I have carefully considered submissions of both the sides.

Perused documents produced on record. Apart from the FIR, copy of
order dated 16.10.2023 in Criminal Bail Application No.2123 of 2023
and copy of charge-sheet is annexed with the application. The earlier
bail application of the applicant is rejected by this Court vide order
dated 16.10.2023 primarily on the ground that investigation was in
progress and there was prima facie involvement of the applicant in the
fraud played upon by the bank.

5
8.

Cri BA No.49-2024
The investigating agency has filed charge-sheet against the
applicant and main accused Rani Durairaj. Other co-accused including
another prime accused Sonali Borse, who allegedly procured forged LIC
policies is yet to be arrested. So far as charge-sheet is concerned, it
appears that the applicant contacted main accused Rani Durairaj
through one Mandar Tendulkar as he was in need of money and
through her, he got sanctioned the loan from the bank.
9.

Investigating officer has recorded statements of Mahesh
Bharat Jadhav, Tilak Suvarna, Ravindra Band and Vinod Ghore. The
statement of Mahesh Jadhav shows that he used to convey main
accused Sonali Borse in his car on rent on her request. The statements
of Ravindra Band and Vinod Ghore go to show that mule accounts were
created in their names to divert the amounts involved in the offence. It
prima facie appears from the charge-sheet that the main role in
siphoning the crime proceeds through mule accounts is attributed to the
co-accused Rani Durairaj and Sonali Borse.
10.

As regards the role attributed to the applicant, though the
loan of Rs.30 lakhs was sanctioned in his name against LIC policy, the
entire amount was transferred by RTGS in another bank accounts and
he received an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- from Mandar Tendulkar in
cash.

This indicates that the applicant was not beneficiary of the
offence of fraud and main accused Rani Durairaj and Sonali Borse were
kingpin of the conspiracy as rightly submitted by learned Advocate for
applicant. It appears that co-accused Sonali Borse who was LIC agent
had procured the bogus LIC policies in the name of borrowers and with
the help of co-accused Rani Durairaj, after gaining confidence of Bank
Manager, they succeeded in sanctioning the loan in favour of the
6
Cri BA No.49-2024
borrowers and received almost entire amount, giving small portions to
the borrowers.
11.

Learned Advocate for applicant argued that applicant has
repaid amount of Rs.1,50,000/- which he received from the loan
amount. however, it is not mentioned in the application that amount is
repaid. In the written contentions, the applicant has undertaken to
repay the said amount to the bank.

The investigation against the
applicant is complete as charge-sheet is filed.

In the light of the
undertaking given by the applicant in the application and the role
attributed to him, in my view, the applicant can be admitted to bail. As
regards other two crimes registered against the applicant, if otherwise
he is entitled to bail, registration of other crimes can not operate as a
bar to enlarge him on bail. Therefore, I pass following order:
ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No.49 of 2024 is allowed.

2.

The applicant Deepak Prataprai Dani, who is accused in C.R.

No.192 of 2023 registered with Dadar Police Station for offence under
sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code, be
released on his executing PR Bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Thousand Only) and on furnishing one or two sureties in the like sum
on following conditions:(a)
The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing
such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
(b)
The applicant shall not tamper with evidence of the
prosecution.

7
(c)
Cri BA No.49-2024
The applicant shall not commit similar offence while
on bail.
(d)
The applicant shall not try to contact the informant or
witnesses personally or through anybody till conclusion of
trial.
(e)
The applicant shall submit documents regarding his
permanent address and contact details to the concerned
police station and the Court, within seven days of his release
and if in future, there is any change in his address or contact
details, intimate the same to the concerned police station.
(f)
The applicant shall attend the trial regularly.

(g)
The applicant to comply with undertaking given in
para No.6(h) of the application, within 15 days of his release,
if already not complied with.
3.

Breach of any of the above conditions shall entail the cancellation
of the bail.
4.

Provisional cash bail of Rs.30,000/- allowed for the period of six
weeks.
5.

Bail before learned trial Court.

6.

Criminal Bail Application No.49 of 2024 is disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 25/01/2024
Order Dictated on: 25/01/2024
Transcribed on : 25/01/2024
Checked on
: 29/01/2024
Signed on
: 29/01/2024
(S.B. PAWAR)
Additional Sessions Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
8
Cri BA No.49-2024
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
29.01.2024
Upload Time
5.08 p.m.

Name of Stenographer
ARUN ANNAMALAI MUDALIYAR
Name of the Judge (With Court SHRI. S.B. PAWAR (CR 58)
Room No.)
THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
of 25.01.2024
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by 29.01.2024
P.O. on
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded 29.01.2024
on