CNR No.

MHCC02­005561­2022
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GR. BOMBAY AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO.989 OF 2022
Devanand Shabaji Pachpute
Age – 54 years, Occ – Business.
R/o ­ “A” Wing, 101, Siddivinayak Complex,
CHS Ltd., Plot No.21, Sector, 10, Kamothe,
Panvel – 410209.

…
Applicant
…
Respondent
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Police Station,
BKC,
C.R.No.335/2018)
Appearance:
Mr. Sachhidanand P. Dalvi, Ld. Adv. for applicant.
Mrs. Rashmi Tendulkar, Ld. Addl. P.P.
CORAM :
DATE :
HIS HONOUR ADDL.SESSIONS
JUDGE M. G. DESHPANDE
(C.R.No.16)
May 11, 2022
ORDER
1.

Applicant Devanand Shabaji Pachpute is accused No.3 in
C.R.No.335/2018 registered with BKC Police Station under Ss. 406,
408, 420, 34 IPC. He is praying for bail. Prosecution vide say Exh.2 of
Investigating Officer strongly objected the application reiterating the
facts involved in the crime and contended to reject the application.
2.

Heard Ld. Adv. Mr. Sachhidanand P. Dalvi for the applicant
and Ld. A.P.P Mrs. Rashmi Tendulkar. Following points arise for my
determination.

I am recording following findings thereon for the
reasons discussed below :­
.. 2..

BA No.989/2022
POINTS
FINDINGS
1.

Whether the applicant­accused has made
out a strong prima­facie case to release him
on bail ?

No
2.

What Order ?

Application stands
rejected
REASONS
POINT NO.1.
FACTS INVOLVED IN C.R.NO.335 OF 2018
3.

One Mr. Sushil Kumar Shridhar Shelar lodged FIR on
15.12.2018 alleging that, Mr. Laxman Dharma Patil filed Writ Petition
No.2191/2014 on behalf of members of the Pfizer Employees
Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. against Government of India and others
alleging fraud and misappropriation made by Directors of the society
and further for refund of the same. The Hon’ble High Court directed
Central Registrar, Agricultural Ministry, New Delhi to inquire and
submits its report.

Accordingly the Central Registrar directed the
informant vide No.R­11017/16/2016­L & M Dt.28/03/2016 to inquire
the said cooperative society as per Section 78(1) of Multi­State
Cooperative Society Rules. Accordingly, informant made the inquiry
and submitted his report on 19.10.2016 to the Central Registrar, New
Delhi.

In the said report, informant specifically submitted that the
Directors of the society had not maintained the details and record in
respect of financial transactions and also made various transactions
without sanction of Annual General Meeting.
4.

Finance report for the year 2007­08 has a mention of a
bank. Informant contacted the said bank and obtained the statement
and further came to found that the Directors had withdrawn cash
.. 3..

BA No.989/2022
amounts time to time without making available any record for the
same. Even the Directors who attended the said inquiry proceedings
could not give satisfactory explanation for their act, as such. Therefore,
the informant held all Directors responsible being their collective
responsibility. Cooperative society had appointed C.A. Mr. Ravindra
Ajgaonkar. On the basis of the information provided by the said C.A.
Mr. Ravindra Ajgaonkar informant arrived at conclusion that there is
fraud of Rs.2,24,79,692.37 and Directors have made the same. The
Hon’ble High Court directed that, proper legal action should be initiated
on the basis of the report of Central Registrar. Accordingly, informant
lodged the FIR against Directors of the said society. These are the facts.
5.

Applicant was arrested on 06.04.2022. He was directed
under police custody remand till 16.04.2022 and thereafter remanded
to judicial custody.
6.

GROUNDS FOR BAIL
a. B.A. No.1195/2022 filed before the Ld. M.M., was rejected
on 18.04.2022
b. Applicant is falsely implicated when had no concern with
the alleged crime.
c. Applicant has not played any vital role, but simply signed he
cheques of loan amount as per his work profile. He was
arrested only on suspicion
d. His further detention in judicial custody is not required as
practically investigation is over.
e. Charges levelled against him are triable by Ld. M.M.
f. No specific role is attributed to him nor there is any direct
evidence pointing out his involvement.
g. Complainant’s company failed to collect EMI of the
disbursed loan amount from their employees, but the
company has directly sanctioned VRS scheme to their
.. 4..

BA No.989/2022
employees and hence, total 135 employees duped society’s
money i.e principal amount plus EMI amount is outstanding
till date, therefore the amount is shown in Crore.
h. The applicant has no connection with co­accused nor a
single rupee relating to fraud is transferred in his account.
i. Crime was registered in 2018 and every time his statement
was recorded in this five years.
j. Further detention of the applicant is not required as no
purpose will be served for the same.
k. On 12.06.2009 the applicant wrote letter of resignation to
the Chairman of the Credit Society and also informed this
fact by legal notice.
l. He is the only earning member of his family and no one is
to look after them.
m. He has permanent resident and ready to abide whatever
conditions court imposes.
7.

First of all vehement contention of the applicant that, there
is enormous delay in FIR will have no bearing while assessing the case
prima­facie.
allegations
It is because initially police had not responded the
relating
to
alleged
fraud,
therefore
Writ
Petition
No.2191/2014 was filed on behalf of Phizer Employees Co­op. Credit
Society Ltd., Mumbai. Wherein the fraud committed by Directors and
members of the said society was alleged.

The Hon’ble High Court
directed the Central Registrar, Agriculture Ministry to inquire the
matter and report the same. Accordingly, he inquired and investigated,
wherein the fraud of Rs.2,24,79,692.37 was revealed pointing out the
involvement of present applicant with others. In the said inquiry as
well as investigation made by the Investigating Officer revealed that
record with necessary details had not been maintained by the credit
Society since 2007 till date. It was also revealed that, the said record
was not maintained as there was fraud committed by Directors and
BA No.989/2022
.. 5..

members of credit society amounting Rs. 2,24,79,692.37. It was also
revealed that one of the accused persons named Ashish Arvind Bhatt
had prepared 7 cheques, total Rs.2,80,000/­ of the society money in his
own name and deposited the same in Bharat Co­op. Credit Bank and
thereafter withdrew the said amount.

All this prima­facie indicates
gravity, seriousness and magnitude of the offence alleged against the
applicant.
8.

It is material to note that, one of the co­accused Sachin
Sakpal, then Treasurer, on 30.05.2016 submitted before Special
Auditor, Class­I, Mumbai that from 2008­09 then Chairman Mr. Shirish
Patil, Mr. Devanand Pachpute, Mr. M.A. Kamble, Mr. Uday Kanchan,
Mr. Austin D’souza, Mr. Yogesh Tavade, Smt. S.G. Duraphe started
withdrawing money by committing fraud. They were aided by Workers
Union General Secretary Mr. Santosh Sawant. Not only this but they
many times threatened the staff for withdrawal of money. Shirish Patil
and the present applicant Devenand Pachpute many times withdrew
money from HDFC Bank, Thane and committed fraud of Rs.36 Lakh.
These facts are sufficient to hold the involvement of the applicant in the
serious offence alleged against him.
9.

It is also revealed that, many financial transactions of the
credit society as such were made with the signature of the present
applicant. It is material to note that, the Ld. Court of First Instance by
order dt.18.04.2022 rejected the bail application of this applicant
observed collusion of the present applicant with other accused persons
noting their malafide intention.

He further observed that applicant
being well acquainted and well verse with the records as well as day­to­
day business of the society, is likely to vanish the evidence if released on
.. 6..

BA No.989/2022
bail.

He also observed that, releasing him on bail would hamper
investigation. He specifically noted that the investigation is in progress,
hence it will not be proper to release the accused at this stage.
Immediately thereafter this application is preferred without pointing out
any change in circumstance. I am of the opinion that, offences alleged
against the applicant are very serious from the point of gravity and
magnitude thereof. It cannot be ignored that, police authorities were
accelerated due to inquiry made by the Central Registrar, Agricultural
Ministry, who was directed by the Hon’ble High Court to inquire.
Therefore, thorough investigation of the offence is necessary. In this
background delay in lodging FIR cannot be capitalized to claim bail. At
the cost of repetition it has to be noted that amount involved in the
offence is huge. It is necessary to investigate the matter thoroughly,
which is not possible if applicant is released on bail. There is every
possibility that, he would interfere the investigation and try to
disappearance of material evidence. Therefore, I am of the opinion that
neither there is change in circumstance after the order dt.18.04.2022
passed by the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, 71st Court, Bandra, Mumbai
nor the merits of the prosecution case warrant release of accused on
bail at this preliminary stage when investigation is in progress. Hence, I
hold that accused could not establish any strong prima­facie case for
granting bail.

Therefore, Point No.1 is answered in the negative and
following order is passed :­
ORDER
Bail Application No.989 of 2022 stands rejected.
MADHAV
GOPAL
DESHPANDE
Dt.: 11.05.2022
Signed on
: 11.05.2022.

Digitally signed by
MADHAV GOPAL
DESHPANDE
Date: 2022.05.11
16:29:30 +0530
( M.G. Deshpande )
Addl. Sessions Judge.
C.R.No.16, Gr.Bombay at Mumbai
BA No.989/2022
.. 7..

“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
11.05.2022
at
hours
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
Name of the Judge
Date
of
pronouncement
judgment/order
(KISHOR PRAKASH SHERWADE)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
HHJ M. G. DESHPANDE
(COURT ROOM NO.16)
of 11.05.2022
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on
11.05.2022
Judgment/order uploaded on
11.05.2022