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 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.

5.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 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 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