1
B.A. 62/24.

MHCC020004242024
Presented on
Registered on
Decided on
Duration
: 06-01-2024
: 06-01-2024
: 25-01-2024
: 0 years, 0 months, 19 days
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 62 OF 2024
Shri Santosh Anant Patil
Age 41 years, Indian Inhabitant,
Occupation: Service, Residing at
B-39, 2nd Floor, Bala Patil Chawl,
Kranti Galli, Worli Gaon, Worli
Colony, Mumbai – 400 030
… Applicant/Accused
– Versus The State of Maharashtra
At the instance of DCB CID Unit No. 12,
Mumbai, C.R.No. 85/2023
(Corresponding C.R.No. 945/2023,
Kandivali Police Station)
… Respondent
Appearance :Advocate Kailash Rathod for the applicant.
A.P.P. Iqbal Solkar for the respondent / State.
CORAM : RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 25/01/2024
ORDER
This is bail application filed by the accused u/sec.439 of
Criminal Procedure Code for releasing him on bail in connection with
2
B.A. 62/24.

C.R.No. 85/2023 (corresponding C.R.No. 945/2023, Kandivali Police
Station) registered with DCB CID, Unit 12, Mumbai for the commission
of offences punishable u/sec. 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2.

It is alleged by the applicant / accused that he is innocent
and falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is in custody
since 27/12/2023. He has fully co-operated to the investigating officer.
The applicant has deep roots in Society. He has undergone custodial
interrogation. Nothing is to be seized or recovered from the possession
of the accused. 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 on the collection of evidence. There is
material substance 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. Read the
written notes of arguments.

3
5.

B.A. 62/24.

It is the case of the prosecution that the informant Supriya
Sarwankar came in contact with the accused Santosh Patil when her
husband was admitted in the hospital and the applicant was working
there. At that time, the accused/applicant assured her that he will
secure job for her son. He asked the informant to pay Rs.5,00,000/- for
the said job. On 26/11/2018 she paid Rs.4,00,000/- to the applicant
and on 11/12/2018 she handed over cheque of Rs.1,00,000/- to the
applicant. Thereafter the applicant introduced the informant with
Prakash Sadaphule, the employee of Bombay Municipal Corporation.
The informant’s son Sagar was asked to attend the medical examination
at Rajawadi Hospital with Prakash Sadaphule. His medical examination
was performed there. Inspite of same no job was offered to Sagar – the
son of the informant. Thereafter the applicant assured the informant
that Mr. Bharat Waghela will secure a job for her son. On 29/01/2021
said Bharat Waghela took the informant and her son at Sion Hospital.
On 17/02/2021 he took them at Balasaheb Hospital and there medical
examination of Sagar was conducted. Inspite of same no job was
offered. Thereafter the applicant Santosh Patil informed the informant
that Sagar will be offered with a job of T.C. in railways. He introduced
the informant with Rohit Erkar in the month of June, 2021. In the
month of August, 2021 Sagar was asked to join training of one month at
Noida. Before that the informant received offer letter of railway having
signature of Chief Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, Delhi. It was also
bearing seal and stamp of Indian Railway. After completion of said
training Sagar was asked to attend the duty at platform at Bandra
Railway Station to record the train number and train timings. Inspite of
demand of identity card no identity card was issued. Salary was also not
received. When the informant and her son verified the truthfulness of
offer letter issued by railways, they came to know that said letter is
4
B.A. 62/24.

forged and fabricated. Therefore, the informant lodged report and
offence is registered.
6.

In short, the informant, her son Sagar were induced by the
accused to pay Rs.5,00,000/- for securing government job. The accused
fabricated the job offer letter of Indian Railways. He also asked the
informant’s son to attend the false training. It is alleged that the
applicant alongwith co-accused have deceived the informant and her
son. They created false and fabricated documents, used it as genuine.
The present applicant has been arrested on 27/12/2023. The learned
advocate for the accused relied on the judgment in Bhimrao S/o Arjun
Panchal V/s. The State of Maharashtra (Criminal Revision Application
No. 35 of 2006), Jarnail Singh V/s. State Of Punjab & Anr. (Criminal
Appeal No. 357 of 2022) (Hon’ble Supreme Court) and Sheila Sebastian
V/s. R. Jawaharaj & Anr. Etc. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 359-360 of 2010)
(Hon’ble Supreme Court).
7.

I have gone through ratio laid down in the aforesaid
judgments. The judgment of Bhimrao Panchal’s case is on the point of
delay in lodging report. In case before me, there is preliminary enquiry
in the complaint and thereafter offence has been registered. Therefore
this judgment is not helpful to the applicant. In judgment of Jarnail
Singh, there was submission that investigation is completed. In case
before me, investigation is in progress. In the judgment of Sheila
Sebastian accused challenged the conviction whereas the case before
me is at preliminary stage of consideration of bail. Therefore, the cited
judgments will not be helpful to the applicant.
8.

As aforesaid, the applicant has been recently arrested on
5
B.A. 62/24.

27/12/2023. The investigation in the case is in progress. Prosecution is
investigating in respect of forged letter of railways and false training.
Charge-sheet is not yet filed. Recovery is pending. If the accused at this
initial stage is released on bail, he will tamper with the prosecution
evidence. Hence, the application is liable to be rejected. In the result, I
pass the following order :
– ORDER Bail Application No. 62/2024 rejected and disposed off
accordingly.

( RAJESH A. SASNE )
Date : 25.01.2024
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed by HHJ on
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

: 25.01.2024
: 29.01.2024
: 30.01.2024
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
31/01/2024
UPLOAD DATE
5.43 p.m.
TIME
Miss M.A.Kulkarni.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge Shri. R.A
Room No.)
Sasne, Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 25/01/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
30/01/2024
ORDER uploaded on
31/01/2024