BA 1598/22
Order
1
MHCC020087442022
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1598 OF 2022
(CNR NO. MHCC02-008744-2022)
IN
C.R.NO.22/2022
Ujwala Ravindra Vatharkar
Aged 48 years, Occ: Housewife,
R/at: Room No. 304, V.R. Castle,
Apte Nagar, New Vashi Naka Kolhapur.

….Applicant/Accused
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Colaba
Police Station)
…. Respondents.

Adv Mr.Samay Pawar for applicant.
APP Mr. Shankar Erande for State.
CORAM:
DATE :
HH THE ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE
SMT.C.V.PATIL
(Court Room No.27)
18th July 2022.

ORDER
1.

The said Bail application is filed by applicant/accused Ujwala
Ravindra Vatharkar and requested to release her on regular bail
BA 1598/22
Order
2
under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As per
contents of the application she is innocent and not concerned with
the offence and ready to abide by the conditions, with these grounds
regular bail application is filed. The IO/ prosecution filed reply at
Exh.02 and strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that
the cheated amount is huge which is yet to be recovered. The
applicant/accused do not have permanent resident. Some crimes are
out of Maharashtra also registered against the applicant/accused and
those offences are of similar kind. It is yet to be find out from where
the applicant/accused prepared bogus appointment letter.

With
these grounds the application is strongly opposed. From the remand
report and say of the IO it appears that the co­accused Arun
Deshmukh and Ujwala Vatharkar have arrested in C.R. No. 22/2022
registered at Colaba police station. The accused have arrested on
22.05.2022. For some days the applicant/accused were remanded in
the police custody and thereafter the accused are in judicial custody.
It
is
the
submission
of
the
prosecution
that
the
present
applicant/accused alongwith co­accused Arun Deshmukh have
induced informant and others to deliver money to them for getting
job. Accordingly, the informant and others have given amount but
they could not get job, therefore, they have registered FIR against the
applicant/accused. From remand report it appears that Rs.1,00,000/­
has been seized by the IO during the police custody of the
applicant/accused
and
thereafter
the
applicant/accused
were
BA 1598/22
Order
3
remanded to the Magistrate custody. So far as the criminal
antecedents is concerned the IO has mentioned the number of crimes
registered against the co­accused Arun Deshmukh. But for the
applicant/accused Ujwala Ravindra Vatharkar the IO also mentioned
three crimes registered against her at Kolhapur police station. At the
time of arguments the Ld. Advocate for the applicant/accused have
filed the bail application and orders thereon passed by the Kolhapur
court and submitted that in all crimes said applicant/accused is
enlarged on bail and therefore now also she is entitled for bail. The
earlier offences registered against the present applicant/accused are
of also similar kind i.e 420 to induce others to deliver property to
accused. The modus operndi of the applicant/accused regarding
commission of offence of similar kind shows that the ¾ offences of
similar
kind
are
registered
against
accused.

When
the
applicant/accused is released on bail by Kolhapur Court in the year
2016, but record disclosed that again the accused have committed
offence ie. present offence after released from earlier offence. The
offenses earlier registered and now registered are of similar kind.
However, the investigation is in progress. Ld. Advocate for the
applicant/accused submitted that considering nature of offence
levelled against the applicant/accused ie 420, 465, 468, 469, 471 r/w
34 of IPC only 60 days
are required to be taken by the IO for
investigation as stated in section 167 of the Cr.P.C . But that is the
question of default bail . The question of default bail and regular are
BA 1598/22
Order
4
of different kinds. At this stage from the record it shows that accused
has criminal antecedents. As well as investigation is in progress. In
such circumstances, tampering of the evidence cannot be ruled out if
accused is released on bail . Accordingly, following order is passed:
ORDER
1.

Cri. Bail Application No.1598/2022 stands rejected.

2.

Thus, Cri. Bail Application No.1598/22 is disposed of.

(C.V.PATIL)
Addl.Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

18/07/2022
Order Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
: 18/07/2022
: 19/07/2022
: 20/07/2022
BA 1598/22
Order
5
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
21.07.2022
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
5.50 p.m.

Ms.K.M.Rana
Name of the Judge (With Court Room No.) HHJ Smt. C.V.Patil (CR
27)
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
of
18/07/2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by P.O. on
21.07.2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded on
21.07.2022