Mumbai, Maharashtra – July 25, 2022 – Sachin Prakashrao Bomble, a bank manager, has had his bail application rejected in connection with a fraud case registered at Tilaknagar Police Station (C.R. No. 477/2021). The Additional Judge, S.M. Menjoge, of the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay, rejected Bomble’s bail application (Criminal Bail Application No. 978 of 2022) citing the misappropriation of funds and his criminal history.
Background of the Case:
Bomble was arrested and charged under Sections 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 409 (criminal breach of trust by1 banker, merchant or agent), 465 (forgery), 467 (forgery of valuable security, will, etc.), and 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Allegations and Arrest:
According to the complainant, Hansaben Mistri, she received Rs. 28,89,795 and Rs. 3,54,827 from LIC upon the death of her husband and wanted to deposit Rs. 25 lakhs in a fixed deposit (FD). She went to The Greater Bombay Co-Operative Bank, where Bomble was the manager. He allegedly prepared two FD receipts for Rs. 15 lakhs but did not provide a receipt for the remaining Rs. 10 lakhs. He also obtained her signatures on blank cheques and other forms. When the complainant went to encash the FDs, she discovered only Rs. 1 lakh remained in her account. Bomble had allegedly withdrawn the rest of the money.
Defense Arguments:
Mr. Ajit Birajdar, representing Bomble, argued that his client was falsely implicated and that no prima facie case was made out against him. He claimed the dispute was of a civil nature and that Bomble’s continued detention was unnecessary.
Prosecution’s Counter-Arguments:
Mr. Ramesh Siroya, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), argued that the offense was serious, a large amount of money was involved, and Bomble had a criminal history. He contended that Bomble might pressure witnesses if released on bail.
Court’s Observations and Decision:
Judge Menjoge reviewed the case diary and considered the law laid down by the Supreme Court in various bail-related cases. He noted that Bomble, as a bank manager, had allegedly prepared FD receipts for only Rs. 15 lakhs when the complainant wanted to deposit Rs. 25 lakhs. He also obtained her signatures on blank cheques and forms and withdrew the money. The court emphasized that the money had not been recovered and that Bomble had a criminal history, including:
- C.R. No. 459/2019 under Sections 420, 465, 468, and 471 of the IPC at Bhandup Police Station.
- C.R. No. 472/2021 under Sections 420, 465, 468, and 471 of the IPC at Tilaknagar Police Station.
“This shows that he is habitually committing same kind of offences by cheating various persons. Considering above facts, gravity and seriousness of offence, and possibility of repetition of similar kind of offence in future, applicant is not entitled for his release on bail,” Judge Menjoge stated in his order.
The court concluded that Bomble was not entitled to bail due to the gravity of the offense, the possibility of him repeating similar offenses, and his criminal history.
Significance of the Ruling:
This ruling highlights the court’s strict approach towards white-collar crimes involving financial institutions and the importance of considering an accused’s criminal history when deciding bail applications. The court’s decision underscores that in cases involving misappropriation of funds and repeat offenses, bail can be denied to prevent further crimes and ensure the integrity of the investigation.
Key Factors in the Bail Rejection:
- Misappropriation of funds by a bank manager.
- Criminal history involving similar offenses.
- Gravity and seriousness of the offense.
- Possibility of repetition of similar offenses.
- Non-recovery of the misappropriated funds.
Future Proceedings:
The trial will proceed in the Sessions Court. The prosecution will be required to prove the charges against Bomble beyond a reasonable doubt. The court will monitor the case to ensure a fair and just outcome.