1 MHNS010048222022 Order below Exh. 1 in Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1122/2022.

1.This is an application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of Cr.P.C. in C. R. No. I­95/2022 registered against applicant Yogesh Dattu Kshirsagar at Panchvati Police Station for the offence punishable under section 420 r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.It is the case of the prosecution that, charge­sheet has been already filed under section 299 of the Cr.P.C. with respect to the above offence which is pending before 8th Joint C.J.S.D. & Additional C.J.M., Nashik. In order to avoid arrest he has preferred the present application.

3.It is submitted by the applicant that he has no direct or indirect involvement in the offence. He has never met with the complainant or the accused Renuka Divekar prior to the incident or at the time of incident nor he spoke with them on mobile or met them in person.

On suspicion he has been implicated in the present offence. There is delay in lodging the FIR. Mobile tower location reflects that he was not present at the spot. CCTV footage of hotel reflects that he was not present at the spot however the I.O. has intentionally not filed the CCTV footage to falsely implicated. He never gave assurance that he will increase the amount thrice. He has not cheated the complainant to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/­ by taking him in confidence. He has cooperated in the investigation by remaining present in the police station. He is residing at the address and using the same mobile. He was never absconding. He never took the bag of the complainant containing Rs.7,00,000/­. Nothing has to be investigated. He has no criminal antecedents. He is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions. Hence, prayed that pre­arrest bail application be granted.

4.On perusing the say of I.O he has objected this application on the count that, the cheated amount is yet to be recovered. Wanted accused are yet to be arrested. They have to recovery the vehicle used in the offence. There is ample evidence against the wanted accused. He will not attend the Court. Wanted accused Yogesh Gangurde and Tejas Wagh are yet to be arrested. Present accused along with Tejas Wagh and arrested accused Renuka Divekar told the complainant that they will convert his money thrice. She told them to get money at that time present accused and his assistant took the money of the complainant and ran away without giving him any amount. There is possibility of threatening the witnesses. There is possibility that they will misappropriate the property.

Present accused was absconding. However, on 10.09.2022 he was found he was taken in custody and was brought to Civil Hospital for medical treatment however he broke the glass of the hospital and sustained injury on his head and interfere in the official work for which offence is registered against him. Notice under section 41(a)(1) of the Cr.P.C. was given to the accused but he did not remain present. They have to arrest the accused and conduct detail investigation. Hence, prayed that application be rejected.

5.Heard Ld. Advocate for the applicant and Ld. APP for the State. On perusing the complaint it is seen that when the complainant was told to show the money at that time one Silver colour Tavera car without number plate came and one person got down whose name was told by Renuka Divekar as Yogesh who told that he will convert the amount thrice at that time two more persons got down and the present accused took the bag consisting of Rs.7,00,000/­. However, they did not give their bag and
all of them sat in car and ran away. They ran behind the car but they ran away.

6.On considering the FIR it is seen that major role has been committed by the present accused in taking cash of Rs.7,00,000/­ from the complainant and running away. His conduct reflects that he intends to cheat the complainant. Charge­sheet has been filed against the present applicant as he was absconding. I.O. has submitted that accused was found, however, he caused injury to himself due to which further investigation could not be completed. Considering the nature of offence detail investigation is necessary. Investigating Officer has submitted that recovery has to be made of cash of Rs.7,00,000/­, vehicle used in the offence. There is every possibility that accused will misappropriate amount of the complainant. All these grounds are justified to grant custody of the accused. Investigating officer has contended that recovery has to be made. Detail interrogation is necessary. Nothing has been brought to reflect that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime.

Thus, considering the nature of allegations, prima­facie case is not made out by applicant for grant of pre­arrest bail. Hence, I pass the following order :­

ORDER

Application is hereby rejected.

Sd/­xxx Nashik.(V.S.Malkalpatte­Reddy) Date : 27/09/2022. Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik.