CNR No.

MHCC02­005056­2022
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GR. BOMBAY AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO.909 OF 2022
Sachin Govind Sakpal
Age – 57 year,
R/o ­ B/503, Sanmitra Society,
Besides Godbole Hospital, M.G. Road,
Naupada, Thane­400602
…
Applicant
…
Respondent
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Police Station,
B.K.C.
C.R.No.335/2018)
Appearance:
Mr. Indrajeet Kulkarni, 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 Sachin Govind Sakpal is accused No.2 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. Mr. Indrajeet Kulkarni for the applicant and
Ld. A.P.P Mrs. Rashmi Tenduklar.
determination.

Following points arise for my
I am recording following findings thereon for the
.. 2..

BA No.909/2022
reasons discussed below :­
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.

BA No.909/2022
4.

.. 3..

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
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.

GROUNDS FOR BAIL
a. Applicant was arrested on 06.04.2022 and remanded in
police custody till 16.04.2022. Eversince he has been in
judicial custody, but ld M.M. erroneously rejected his bail
application apprehending the possibility of tampering of
evidence.
b. He has not influenced any witness directly or indirectly and
all remand applications indicate this fact.
c. All documents and evidence is with I.O. hence, question of
tampering does not arise.
d. There is no evidence against the applicant pointing out his
involvement and there is no justifiable reason for detaining
him.

6.

First of all vehement contention of the applicant that, there
is enormous delay in FIR will have no bearing while assessing the case
prima­facie.

It is because initially police had not responded the
.. 4..

BA No.909/2022
allegations
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
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.
7.

It is material to note that, the special Auditor, Class­I,
Mumbai in his rojnama dt.30.05.2016 specifically noted the statement
made by the present applicant Sachin Sakpal that, the credit society was
working properly till 2007­08.

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.

BA No.909/2022
.. 5..

Shirish Patil and Devenand Pachpute many times withdrew money from
HDFC Bank, Thane and committed fraud of Rs.36 Lakh. Mr. Sachin
Sakpal was dismissed from the society. Though the applicant referred
so many names and put the gun on their shoulders, does not absolve
him from his participation. It cannot be ignored that at the relevant
time present applicant was Treasurer of the society.
8.

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
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.
9.

Ld. Advocate pointed out letter dt. 15.01.2019 written by
the applicant to the District special Auditor that he had resigned the
.. 6..

BA No.909/2022
post way back and not responsible for the fraud alleged against him. In
the said letter he further disclosed the modus­operandi availed by other
accused contending his innocence. I carefully examined this letter and
argument of Ld. Adv. for the accused.

It has to be noted that
investigation is at very preliminary stage and same is in progress as
observed by the Ld. M.M. while rejecting the first bail application of the
present applicant. Careful reading of the said letter clearly indicates
admission on the part of the applicant that he was working as a
Treasurer of the said society for the period from 2007­2014. Therefore,
at the moment the investigation is in progress, the alleged resignation
of the applicant has no bearing on the bail application.
10.

Ld. Adv. for the accused placed his reliance Joseph Salvaraj
A. Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors., (2011)7 SCC 59 wherein the Hon’ble
Supreme Court while deciding proceedings under Ss. 482, 227, 228 and
154 of Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR held that, there appears no cheating or
dishonest inducement for delivery of property or breach of trust by the
appellant and the FIR is an abuse of process of law, whereby purely civil
dispute is sought to be given colour of criminal offence to wreak
vengeance against the applicant. I carefully read this authority. It has
to be noted that, investigation and inquiry made by Central Registrar
through
Special
Auditor
prima­facie
revealed
fraud
of
Rs.2,24,79,692.37 made by Directors, members of the society and
others. The investigation took place only when the Hon’ble High Court
directed the inquiry.

Prima­facie facts involved in the present case
nowhere disclose any civil dispute which is tried to be given a colour of
criminal dispute that too, by way of actuated malices and malafide
intention. Therefore, ratio of this authority is not applicable to the
present case.

.. 7..

BA No.909/2022
11.

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.909 of 2022 stands rejected.
MADHAV
GOPAL
DESHPANDE
Dt.: 11.05.2022
Signed on
Digitally signed
by MADHAV
GOPAL
DESHPANDE
Date: 2022.05.11
16:29:11 +0530
( M.G. Deshpande )
Addl. Sessions Judge.
C.R.No.16, Gr.Bombay at Mumbai
: 11.05.2022
BA No.909/2022
.. 8..

“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