B.A.1702/2022
..1..
Order
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1702 OF 2022
( CNR NO.: MHCC020092632022 )
Bhavin Rameshchandra Timbadia
Age: 45 years, Occ: Rickshaw Driver
R/o: B1701 and 1702, Adinath Tower,
Narsingh Lane, Malad (West),
Mumbai 400 064.
…Applicant/Accused.
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra.
( At the instance of EOWUnit3
Vide C.R. No.112/2016)
…Respondents/State.
Appearance:
Mr. Girish Kulkarni a/w Mr. Sagar Kasar Advocate for the
Applicant/Accused.
Mr. Ramesh Siroya, APP for the State/respondent.
CORAM : S.M. MENJOGE, THE ADDL.
JUDGE (C.R.17)
DATE : 21/07/2022.
ORDER
1.
This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. for bail by
applicant/accused
Bhavin
Rameshchandra
Timbadia
in
crime
No.112/2016 under section 409,411,414,420,465,467,468,471,474,
201,120(b) of IPC, registered at EOW Unit3 (General Cheating),
Mumbai.
Facts in brief are as under :
2.
That, Sanjay Shah and Mitesh Mehta are the Directors of M/s.
Somil Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. They purchased raw materials required for
B.A.1702/2022
..2..
Order
manufacturing of medicines from complainant Sanjay Sangavi and
others during the period from April 2016 to November 2016, on credit
of 90 days. Sanjay Shah and Mitesh Mehta sold the same to various
customers at Delhi, Haryana, Indore etc. But, did not pay the said
amount of said purchased material to complainant and others. They
cheated them by Rs.45,33,10,242/ Based on these allegations offence
came to be registered against the accused Vide Crime No. 444/2016 at
L.T. Marg Police Station initially. Later on, it was handed over to
Economic Offences Wing and it is registered as Crime No.112/2016.
3.
Mr. Girish Kulkarni Advocate for applicant/accused has submitted
that applicant is falsely implicated in this case. No primafacie case is
made out against the applicant. There is no allegation against this
applicant in FIR. Applicant is not Director of M/s. Somil Enterprises. On
the other hand he cooperated the police in investigation. Police has
seized Rs. 58 lacs and also material lying in the Godown, computers,
documents etc. from Coaccused Sanjay Shah. Police also freezed his
accounts. No purpose would be served by keeping this applicant behind
the bar. Hence, he prayed to release the applicant/accused on bail.
4.
Mr. Ramesh Siroya, APP for the State, has submitted that offence
is serious and the chargesheet is not filed. Fraud is of more than Rs. 45
Crores. Meager amount of Rs.58 lacs is seized till date. Another co
accused i.e. Director Mitesh Mehta left the India.
Therefore, if the
accused is released on bail he may tamper the evidence. Hence, he
prayed to reject the application.
5.
I perused the case diary and heard the advocate for the applicant
B.A.1702/2022
..3..
Order
and A.P.P. for the State. I have gone through the Law laid down in
respect of grant or refusal of bail, in following cases by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court :
1]
2]
3]
4]
Sanjay Chandra Vs C.B.I., 2011 (13) SCALE 107,
(2012) 1 SCC 40;
Moti Ram Vs State of M.P., MANU/SC/0132/1978: (1978) 4
SCC 47;
Babu Singh Vs State of U.P., (1978)1 SCC 579;
Vaman Narain Ghiya Vs State of Rajasthan,
MANU/SC/8394/2008 : (2009) 2 SCC 281;
5]
Siddharam Mhetre Vs State of Maharashtra, MANU/SC/
1021/2010 : (2011) 1 SCC 694,
6]
7]
8]
VivekKumarVs State of U. P., (2000) 9 SCC 443;
Prahlad Singh Bhati Vs NCT, Delhi,
MANU/SC/0193/2001 : (2001) 4 SCC 280;
State of U.P. Vs Amarmani Tripathi, (2005) 8 SCC 21;
9]
Prahlad Singh Bhati .Vs. NCT, Delhi (2001)4 SCC 280
10]
Gurcharan Singh .Vs. State (Delhi Admn.) (1978)1 SCC118.
11]
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar .Vs. Rajesh Ranjan (2004) 7 SCC 528
12]
Ram Govind Upadhyay .Vs. Sudarshan Singh (2002)3 SCC 598
13]
Puran .Vs. Rambilas (2001) 6 SCC 338.
14]
Neeru Yadav .Vs. State of UP,AIR 2015 SC 3703
15]
Sharad Kumar..Vs…C.B.I, MANU/DE/2374/2011
17]
Bhadresh .Vs. state of Bihar , (2016)1SCC 152
18]
Bharat Choudhary .Vs. State of Bihar (2003) 8 SCC 77
19]
Munish Bhasin .Vs. State (NCT), (2009)4 SCC 45
20]
Niranjan Singh .vs. Prabhakar Kharote AIR 1980 SC 785,
21]
State of M.P. .Vs. RamKishna Balothia AIR 1995 SC 1198
22]
Pokar Ram .Vs. State of Raj.AIR 1985 SC 969,
23]
Samunder Singh .Vs. State of Raj. AIR 1987 SC 737
B.A.1702/2022
24]
25]
26]
27]
28]
..4..
Order
Ravindra Saxena .Vs. State of Raj. (2010)1 SCC 684
Pravinbhai Patel .Vs. State of Gujarat (2010)7 SCC 598
Ram Govind Upadhay .Vs. Sudarshan Singh (2002) 3 SCC 598,
State of Mah. .Vs. Anand Dighe AIR 1990 SC 625,
Anil Kumar Tulsiyani .Vs. State of U.P. (2006)9 SCC 425)
and considered following factors while deciding this bail application :
(i)
Whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe
that the accused had committed the offence;
(ii)
Nature and gravity of the charge;
(iii)
Severity of the punishment in the event of conviction;
(iv)
Danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail;
(v)
Character, Behaviour, Means, Position and Standing of the
accused;
(vi)
Likelihood of the offence being repeated;
(vii) Reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with
and
(viii) Danger of justice being thwarted by grant of bail.
6.
In the light of law laid down in above cases, I perused the case
diary. On perusal of the same, it is found that, present applicant Bhavin
Timbodiya is not Director of M/s. Somil Enterprises. He has not
purchased any material from the complainant and other witnesses. His
name is not mentioned by complainant in FIR. It is the submission of the
Investigating officer that though this applicant had not purchased any
material from M/s. Somil Enterprises, Rs.8,31,58,000/ were transferred
to his account by said firm and this amount was part of money obtained
by Said firm by selling material
required for manufacturing of
medicines to various firm. Thus, according to Investigating officer this
applicant is involved in this offence. However,
Investigating officer
B.A.1702/2022
..5..
Order
himself stated that above amount was retransferred to M/s Somil
Enterprises by this applicant through RTGS. If some amount is received
by applicant from said Firm and same is returned to it by RTGS it does
not mean that this applicant was in conspiracy with other accused. It
cannot be presumed that said amount was part of amount received by
cheating the complainant. No person would ask the sender about source
of money. Accused is arrested on 13.6.2022 and since then he is in jail.
Nothing is required to be seized from him. He has already returned the
amount received by him to M/s. Somil Enterprises through bank.
Considering all these facts, I have come to conclusion that no purpose
would be served by keeping the applicant behind the bar. Hence, I pass
following order.
ORDER
1.
Bail Application No. 1702/2022 is allowed.
2.
Applicant/accused namely Bhavin Rameshchandra Timbadiya
shall be released on bail , upon his executing PR Bond of
Rs.50,000/ (Fifty Thousand only) with one or two sureties of the
like amount in Crime No.112/2016 under section 409, 411, 414,
420, 465, 467, 468, 471,474,201,120(b)of IPC, registered at
E.O.W. Unit3 ( General Cheating) Mumbai, on the following
conditions that :
a)
He shall not pressurize the prosecution
witnesses in any manner.
b)
He shall not commit any offence while onbail
c)
He shall attend the dates of Court regularly unless
exempted by the Court.
d)
He shall furnish his correct address to the
B.A.1702/2022
..6..
Order
investigating officer.
3.
He be released on provisional cash bail of
Rs.50,000/. Duration of provisional cash bail shall
be for four weeks.
4.
Bail before Ld. Magistrate.
5.
Bail Application No.1702/2022 is disposed of
accordingly.
Digitally signed
by SHASHANK
SHASHANK
MANOHARRAO
MANOHARRAO MENJOGE
MENJOGE
Date: 2022.07.21
17:03:08 +0530
( S.M. MENJOGE )
Addl. Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Date of sign
: 21.07.2022.
: 21.07.2022.
: 21.07.2022.
B.A.1702/2022
..7..
Order
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER”
21.07.2022.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
Mrs. S.S.Sawant
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court Room
No.)
S.M. MENJOGE, Addl. Judge.,City Civil &
Sessions Court, (C.R.No.17).
Date of pronouncement of /Order
21.07.2022.
Order signed by P.O. on
21.07.2022.
order uploaded on
21.07.2022.