Cri. Bail Application No. 596 of 2022 ORDER BELOW EX. 01 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION
NO. 596 OF 2022
{Shri. Chandrashekhar Madhavrao Ayachit vs. The State of Maharashtra through Sarkarwada Police Station}
This is an application under section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail in crime No. 89 of 2022 registered with Sarkarwada Police Station for the offence punishable under sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 of the I. P. C.
02] The applicant contended that he has not committed any offence. The case is based upon the documentary evidence and the documents are duly registered and are available with public office. The
complainant has no locus standi to file the complaint. She is just blackmailing him. She has filed such complaint before Police Commissioner, Nashik and at Police Station, Nashik in the year 2021. But, her complaint was disposed off having no substance. The transfer took place in the year 2005 and after 17 years, she is filing such false complaint. The applicant is 76 years old and suffering many physical
ailments. He is permanent resident of Nashik having landed property in Nashik. He has deep roots in the society. He is ready to cooperate the investigation. He has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
03] APP filed say at Ex. 12 and I. O. filed say at Ex. 11. They have stated that the main accused is present accused namely Chandrashekhar Madhavrao Ayachit and he prepared forged document of development agreement and power of attorney. Out of seven people, three people were impersonated and those people were cheated. The accused Shrawan Kacharu Shelke and Abhijit Avinash Bhalerao are the impersonated people in the place of original people and the present accused with their help committed offence. The accused is the author of forged document and the mastermind of the crime. Specific allegations are against him. The accused has cheated the complainant and the witnesses. The offence is complicated and custodial interrogation of the accused is required. Hence, he has prayed for rejection of anticipatory bail.
04] Heard the learned counsel for the accused and learned APP. They have argued as per the above stand taken. Also, the complainant appeared through advocate and her advocate also resisted the
application and prayed for rejection of the bail.
05] I have gone through application, say, documents, arguments and Police papers. Primafacie, it appears to the court that the present accused no. 1 and accused nos. 28 and 29 are the main accused in this case and they appear to have prepared forged document in the nature of development agreement and power of attorney by impersonating three persons, who alleged to have shares in the said property. Accused nos. 1, 28 and 29 are in hand in glove with the accused no. 1. His act is intentional and with preplanning. He is the mastermind of the crime and he cheated many people, including the purchasers. He is old aged and appears to have ailments, does not entitle him for grant of
anticipatory bail. The offence is of serious nature and the punishment is severe. His custodial interrogation is required. The offence is a white collar crime. He is not entitled for anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
Application is rejected.
Date : 26.05.2022
(R. R. Rathi) I/c. Additional Sessions Judge 7, Nashik.