Mumbai, January 31, 2024 – The Sessions Court of Greater Mumbai has denied bail to Santosh Anant Patil (41), an accused in a fraud case involving a fake government job offer. Patil was arrested for allegedly cheating a woman and her son of ₹5,00,000 by promising a job in the Indian Railways.

The bail application (B.A. No. 62/2024), filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), was heard and rejected by Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh A. Sasne in Court Room No. 30. The judge ruled that the investigation was still ongoing, and releasing the accused at this stage could hamper evidence collection and interfere with the judicial process.

Case Background

The case originated from an FIR registered at Kandivali Police Station (C.R. No. 945/2023), later transferred to DCB CID, Unit 12 (C.R. No. 85/2023).

According to the First Information Report (FIR):

• The complainant, Supriya Sarwankar, met the accused while her husband was hospitalized, where Patil was working.
• Patil assured her that he could arrange a government job for her son, Sagar, in exchange for ₹5,00,000.
• On November 26, 2018, she paid ₹4,00,000 in cash, followed by a ₹1,00,000 cheque on December 11, 2018.
• Patil introduced her to a man named Prakash Sadaphule, allegedly a Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC) employee, who conducted a fake medical examination for Sagar at Rajawadi Hospital.
• Despite repeated assurances, no job materialized, prompting Patil to introduce another intermediary, Bharat Waghela, who conducted additional fake medical tests at Sion and Balasaheb Hospitals in 2021.
• The complainant eventually received an offer letter, allegedly signed by the Chief Personnel Officer of Northern Railway, Delhi, but the job never materialized.
• Patil then claimed that Sagar would receive a position as a Train Ticket Collector (TC) in the Railways and was sent for a one-month training program in Noida.
• After the training, Sagar was instructed to report to Bandra Railway Station, where he recorded train numbers and timings, but never received an identity card or salary.
• Upon verifying the authenticity of the offer letter, the complainant discovered it was forged and fraudulent, leading her to file a police complaint.

Prosecution’s Opposition to Bail

Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Iqbal Solkar, representing the State of Maharashtra, opposed the bail plea, arguing that:

1. The accused played a direct role in deceiving the victim, involving multiple fake tests, intermediaries, and forged documents.
2. The investigation was ongoing, and releasing Patil on bail could allow him to tamper with evidence.
3. The railway job offer letter was a forgery, and authorities were still examining the extent of the fraud.
4. If granted bail, Patil might abscond, intimidate witnesses, or obstruct further investigations.

Defense’s Arguments for Bail

Representing the accused, Advocate Kailash Rathod contended that:

• Patil had been falsely implicated and had no role in the alleged forgery.
• He had already cooperated with the police investigation, and no further recovery was pending.
• The complainant delayed filing the FIR, raising doubts about her credibility.
• Patil was a permanent resident of Mumbai, with deep roots in society, reducing the risk of absconding.
• The case was a civil dispute rather than a criminal offense, and the prosecution lacked direct evidence linking Patil to document forgery.

To support his arguments, the defense cited three legal precedents from the Supreme Court and High Courts, including Bhimrao S/o Arjun Panchal v. State of Maharashtra, Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab, and Sheila Sebastian v. R. Jawaharaj. However, the court ruled that these cases were not applicable because:

• The case involved an ongoing investigation, unlike the cited cases where investigation was complete.
• The prosecution was still verifying the authenticity of forged documents and the fake training programs.

Court’s Observations and Bail Rejection

After reviewing the evidence, prosecution’s submissions, and defense arguments, Judge Rajesh A. Sasne noted:

1. The investigation was still at an early stage, and authorities were still collecting evidence.
2. The accused allegedly fabricated multiple government documents, including an Indian Railways job offer letter, which required further scrutiny.
3. There was a strong possibility that the accused could tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses if granted bail.
4. The recovery of additional evidence was still pending, making custodial interrogation necessary.

The court, therefore, rejected the bail application, stating that releasing Patil at this stage would jeopardize the investigation.

Legal and Social Implications

This case underscores the increasing prevalence of employment fraud schemes, where unsuspecting job seekers are duped with fake government appointments. With youth unemployment concerns at an all-time high, scams involving fake job offers, forged government documents, and fraudulent training programs have become a major societal issue.

The court’s decision reflects a zero-tolerance approach toward white-collar crimes, ensuring that investigations are not compromised and victims receive justice.

With Patil remaining in judicial custody, the case will proceed toward charge-sheet filing and trial, where further evidence will determine the extent of the scam and potential involvement of additional suspects.

---

Would you like further refinements or insights into similar fraud cases and legal precedents?