1
B.A.461/24
MHCC020030432024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No.461 OF 2024
Hartali Prasad Rohidas
Age 42 years, Occ – Service,
Chandni Aagar, S.M. Road,
Milap Shakti Mahila Mandal,
Antophill, Mumbai 400 037.

….Applicant
– Versus –
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Mumbai Central
Railway Police Station
vide CR.No. 110/2024)
… Respondent
Appearance :Advocate Durgesh Jaiswal for the applicant.
A.P.P. Iqbal Solkar for the respondent / State.
CORAM : RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 06/03/2024
ORDER
This is an application filed by the accused u/sec.439 of
Criminal Procedure Code for releasing him on bail in connection with
CR.No.110/2024 registered with Mumbai Central Railway Police
Station
Mumbai
for
the
commission
of
offences
punishable
u/sec.419,420,465,468,471 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 and Section
66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

2
2.

B.A.461/24
It is alleged by the applicant / accused that he is innocent
and falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is in custody
since 03.02.2024, he has fully co-operated to the investigating officer.
The applicant is only earning member of his family. He has undergone
custodial interrogation. Nothing is to be seized or recovered from the
possession of the accused. There is no criminal antecedents against him.
The applicant / accused is permanent resident of his given address.
Therefore, there is no point in keeping accused behind bars till
conclusion of trial. Therefore he prayed for releasing him on bail.
3.

The prosecution opposed the application by filing reply
vide Exh.2. It is the contention of the prosecution that if the accused is
released on bail it will affect the collection of evidence. There is
material against the applicant / accused. If accused is released on bail
he will flee away from the justice. There is material evidence to show
the involvement of the accused in the present crime. If the accused is
released on bail there are chances of threatening of prosecution
witnesses and tampering of prosecution evidence. Hence, prosecution
prayed for rejection of the application.
4.

Read the application, say filed by the prosecution. Heard
the ld. Advocate for the applicant, and ld. APP for the State.
5.

It is the case of the prosecution that the officer of Vigilance
Department Churchgate, Mumbai. Mr. Sanjaykumar Sharma received
information from newspaper reporter that the applicant is offering job
in the railway and cheating the persons. Therefore, at the instance of
the informant, decoy candidate was asked to contact the applicant. The
applicant / accused demanded certain amounts from the said decoy
3
B.A.461/24
candidate and asked him to deposit those amounts in his account.
Therefore, decoy customer Shankar Sharma transferred Rs.20,000/- by
google pay to the said account and also handed over cheque of Rs.3
lakhs. Said cheque was dishonored. Thereafter the applicant through
email irailwaygovt@gmail.com forwarded verification and medical call
letter dated 12.01.2024 on email ID of said decoy candidate Shankar
Sharma.
6.

It is further case of the prosecution that on 28.01.2024 the
applicant asked Sujeet Mishra to meet him on 02.02.2024 at Mumbai
Central Railway Station. When he came there, the team of railway
police caught him. The report is lodged and offence is registered
u/Sec.419,4220,465,468,471 of the Indian Penal Code.
7.

The offence was initially registered u/Sec.420 of IPC. It
appears that lateron other sections like 465,468,471 are added. The
offences are punishable upto 7 years. Since 3.2.2024 the accused is
behind bars. No recovery is pending against him. His further presence
can be secured by putting reasonable conditions as to attendance. The
prosecution has not shown that the accused has been convicted in any
offence, hence pendency of criminal case at Jalgaon will not make him
dis-entitled for the bail. Since last more than one month he is behind
bars. Offences are punishable upto 7 years. Hence, considering the facts
on record the accused is entitled to be released on bail. In the result, I
pass the following order :
ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No.461 of 2024 is allowed.

4
2.

B.A.461/24
The Applicant / Accused Hartali Prasad Rohidas, arrested in
C.R.No.110/2024 under Section 419,420,465,468,471 of the Indian
Penal Code,1860 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act,
2000, registered with Mumbai Central Railway Police Station, Mumbai
be released on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.25,000/- with one
or two sureties.
3.

The applicant / accused shall not tamper with the prosecution
witnesses and evidence in any manner.
4.

The applicant / accused shall attend the conern police station on
1st and 3rd Saturday of every month till filing of the charge-sheet.
5.

Provisional cash bail in the like amount is allowed. The accused
shall furnish surety within 4 weeks from the date of release from jail
failing which the cash bail shall stand forfeited without any separate
order to that effect.
6.

The applicant / accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court.
7.

Bail before the concern Magistrate.

Date : 06/03/2024
Dictated on
Transcribe on
Signed by HHJ on
: 06.03.2024
: 07.03.2024
: 07.03.2024
( RAJESH A. SASNE)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

5
B.A.461/24
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
07/03/2024
6.06 p.m.

UPLOAD DATE
TIME
J.S. Chavan
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge Shri.
Room No.)
R.A. SASNE, Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 06/03/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
07/03/2024
ORDER uploaded on
07/03/2024