Cri. Bail Application No.1716/2020

Gaurav Satish Shelake .. Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra, (EOW) (Sarkarwada P.Stn.) .. Respondent

Order below Exh.1

1.The applicant has filed this application for bail under Section 439 of Cr. P.C. The applicant is prosecuted for the offence punishable u/s 120B, 406, 420, 467, 468, r.w. 34 of IPC vide C.R. No.I­177/2019 registered at Sarkarwada Police Station, Nashik, Dist.Nashik.

2.It is the case of the prosecution that :

One of the accused Aniruddha Avinash More was appointed as gold valuer by the informant bank Business Co­ Operative Bank. The said accused in collusion with the other accused who are the borrowers, pledged bogus gold jewelery with the bank and the said jewelery was certified as genuine gold by the main accused Aniruddha Avinash More. Against the said bogus gold the present applicant as well as other 28 accused obtained loan. However, various loan amount were not repaid and on making inquiry it was disclosed that the gold pledged with the Bank were not of gold. Accordingly, the said accused cheated the bank of an amount of more than Rs.4,47,00,000/­ (Rupees Four crores fourty seven lacs only).

Thereafter, on the report of Vishal Arun Dani, Branch Manager of Business Co. Op. Bank Ltd. M.G.Road, Nashik, aforesaid offence was registered.

3.The Ld. Advocate Shri.Sonawane submitted that the applicant was in need of money for business purpose. He met accused Amol Dinkar Patil and Vishal Girijaram Jadhav and asked from them loan of Rs.25,000/­. The said persons told him that they did not have money but Amol Dinkar Patil was having some family gold which can be placed with Business Bank. The said 2 persons accordingly pledged gold provided by Amol Dinkar Patil and obtained loan of Rs.20,00,000/­. Out of the said amount Rs.25,000/­ was given to the applicant and 19,70,000/­ was taken by Amol Dinkar Patil and Vishal Girijaram Jadhav. The Ld. Advocate further submitted that the said persons have also promised to repay the loan amount, but they defaulted after some time. The Ld. Advocate further submitted in the due course it was disclosed that the gold provided by Amol Dinkar Patil was bogus. The Ld. Advocate further submitted that he has been cheated by the said persons and for the said complaint was lodged on 09.12.2020 by the father of the applicant with Sarkarwada Police Station and Commission of Police, Nashik. The Ld. Advocate submitted that at no point of time the present applicant used the sanctioned loan amount and has only received Rs.25,000/­ out of the said Rs.20,00,000/­. The Ld. Advocate further submitted that the applicant works as driver and is the only earning member of the family. He is working as auto rickshaw driver. He is permanent resident of Nashik and does not have any antecedents. The Ld.

Advocate accordingly submitted that the applicant be released on bail.

4.The Ld. A.P.P. submitted that the offence is serious in nature. The Ld. APP submitted that the present applicant in collusion with the valuer of the bank Aniruddha Avinash More pledged bogus gold ornament. The Ld. APP submitted that the present applicant obtained loan of Rs.20,00,000/­ from the Bank.

5. The Ld. APP submitted that the present applicant in collusion with the valuer of the Bank Aniruddha Avinash More has in a very planned manner cheated the Bank of an amount of more than Rs.20,00,000/. The Ld. APP further submitted that the present applicant is the part of the racket which involved other borrowers which has cheated the other more than Rs.4,47,00,000/­ (Rupees Four Crores Fourty Seven Lacs only). Accordingly, the learned APP accordingly, prayed for the rejection of the application.

6.In view of the facts mentioned in the application, following points arise for my determination and I have recorded my findings thereon for the reasons stated below :

POINTS FINDINGS
(1) Whether the applicant is entitled for bail ? .. No
(2) What order ? .. As per final order.

REASONS

7.I have perused the documents. Heard the Ld. Advocates appearing for the parties.

8.It is settled principle that while considering application for bail, court need not conduct preliminary trial of the case or consider probability of the guilt or innocence of the accused. While considering the application for bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of the accusations, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character and standing of the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with and the larger interest of the public and State.

9.Perusal of the documents, show that around 29 borrowers have obtained loan from Business Co­Op.Bank by pledging bogus gold. The said bogus gold was certified to be genuine by valuer of the Bank Aniruddha Avinash More, who is also one of the accused.

10.Perusal of the documents further show that initially monthly installments towards repayment of the loan were paid by the borrowers and thereafter, they defaulted. In fact, in certain cases, after a year also the loan was renewed and more loan was obtained against the same bogus gold.

11.During the investigation, after default of certain borrowers, while taking steps to sell the pledged gold, it was discovered that the same was bogus. In fact, thereafter, on further investigation by the Bank, it was disclosed that most of the gold pledged by the defaulting borrowers, which were certified as genuine by Aniruddha More was bogus.

12.During the investigation, it was disclosed that around 29 of the borrowers including the valuer Aniruddha Avinash More have obtained loan to the extent of more than Rs.4,47,00,000/­ (Rupees Four Crores Fourty Seven Lacs only) by pledging bogus gold.

13.Perusal of the documents including the report filed by the investigation officer shows that the present applicant as well as the other borrowers in collusion with the valuer of the Bank Aniruddha Avinash More have cheated the Bank of more than Rs.4,47,00,000/­ (Rupees Four Crores Fourty Seven Lacs only). The said cheating and the fraud played on the Bank was done in a very planned manner.

14.Although the Ld. Advocate has submitted that out of the loan amount of Rs.20,00,000/­ Rs.19,70,000/­ was given to Amol Dinkar Patil and Vishal Girijaram Jadhav by way of cash as well as Cheque, but no record has been filed on record to support the said contention. Except complaint dated 09.12.2020, which has been lodged after filing of this application on 05.12.2020, there is nothing on record to show that any action was taken against the said persons by the present applicant. Perusal of the documents show that investigation is still going on.

15.Accordingly, as discussed herein above considering the role of the applicant and the nature of the offence, in my opinion, at this stage, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. Hence I pass the following order :

6

ORDER

The application is rejected.

Digitally signed by Santoshkumar Santoshkumar Tribhuandutt Pandey Tribhuandutt Date: 2020.12.09 Pandey 16:09:09 +0530 (S.T. Pandey) Nashik. Dist. Judge­ 4 and Date : 09­12­2020. Addl. Sessions Judge, Nashik.