1
BA 143/22
MHCC020007432022
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION No. 143 OF 2022
Ghyanshyam S. Sharma
R/o. : F/26, Godjrej Park,
Khadakpada, Kalyan – 421 301.
The State of Maharashtra
(Through Santacruz police
station, vide Cr. No.546/2021)
… Applicant
Versus
… Respondent
Appearance :
Mr. Tanaji Londhe, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. D. M. Lade, A.P.P. for respondent.
CORAM : SHRI. U. M. PADWAD,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 11/02/2022.
ORDER
.
Perused application, reply and record. Heard parties.
2]
The accused has allegedly posed himself as General
Manager of Union Bank of India, Fort, Mumbai and offered to arrange
for bank guarantee for the informant who deals in finances. He also
arranged for a meeting between the informant and the Lokhandwala
Builder. The accused also assured that he would get a finance of Rs. 20
Crores. The Lokhandwala Builder gave certain documents. However,
that work is still pending. Thereafter again some meetings were
2
BA 143/22
convened. The accused then demanded 15% of the amount of bank
guarantee of which 2% were to be paid in advance and the remaining at
various stages till the bank guarantee is issued finally. The informant
sent documents of his one client namely Parekh Developers who needed
a bank guarantee for Rs. 10 Crores, to the accused. The accused also
accepted Rs. 2,00,000/ from the informant for that work. This
happened in July 2021. In September 2021 the accused approved the
bank guarantee draft. Said Parekh Developers transferred Rs.
30,00,000/ to the informant who in turn transferred Rs. 20,00,000/ to
the accused. The accused however, thereafter started giving evasive
replies and failed to give the bank guarantee. The informant then
lodged the report.
3]
The accused claims that he only renders financial services
and received the amount as service charge from the informant. He did
not cheat the informant nor ever had any such intention. He is in
custody since 27/12/2021 and his further detention is not necessary.
He is ready to cooperate in investigation. He also submitted that the
other coaccused has been granted protection from arrest by the
Honourable High Court. There is no ground to detain him further.
Hence he prayed for bail.
4]
The prosecution opposing the application submitted that
the accused himself has made all the representations and also forged
various documents to cheat the informant. He even posed himself to be
the General Manager of the Union Bank of India. Thus he has intention
to cheat since beginning. He has received money. The investigation is
still going on and, therefore, rejection of the application is prayed for.
3
5]
BA 143/22
It is very much clear from the report and record that the
accused only has made certain representations and induced the
informant to part with money. It is also to be noted that the accused has
shown courage to forge a draft bank guarantee and also generated a
fake eMail bearing fake stamp and seal of Alana Group Co. and the
State Bank of India, Fort branch. The offence thus is very serious. The
investigation is still incomplete. The entire money was received by the
accused and he only dealt with the informant and as such he apparently
is the main culprit. Therefore, grant of protection from arrest to the co
accused would offer no help to him. His release is bound to be an
impediment in further investigation and consequently he is not entitled
for bail. Hence the order :
ORDER
Application is rejected.
Digitally signed
by UDAY
MANOHARRAO
UDAY
MANOHARRAO PADWAD
PADWAD
Date:
2022.02.11
16:05:33 +0000
( U. M. Padwad )
Date : 11/02/2022.
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
11/02/2022
03:55 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE
TIME
V. V. Kulkarni
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court His Honour The Additional Sessions
Room No.)
Judge Shri. U. M. Padwad,
Court Room No. 30
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 11/02/2022
ORDER signed by P.O. on
11/02/2022
ORDER uploaded on
11/02/2022