1 crwp918.15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.918/2015
Rakeseh s/o Ramchandra Warpatkar,
aged about 26 years, Occ. Private Service,
r/o Panchasheel Ward, Tq. Rajura,
Dist. Chandrapur. .....PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
The State of Maharashtra, through
Police Station Officer, Police Station,
Rajura, Dist. Chandrapur. ...RESPONDENT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms G. B. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for petitioner.
Mrs. M. H. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for respondent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED :- 14.06.2017 ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.
2. The petitioner and his wife Gomati floated a scheme named and styled as "Money Mantra Financials". Thereafter this couple collected deposits from various depositors. The total deposits which they have collected from the small depositors appears to be near about Rs. 3 crores.
::: Uploaded on - 15/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/06/2017 00:59:49 :::
2 crwp918.15.odt
3. A crime was registered against the present petitioner vide Crime No.183/13 with Police Station Rajura for the offence punishable under Section 467, 468 read with Section 34 of the IPC. Subsequently, an offence punishable under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 was also registered against them. The present petitioner was released on regular bail by this Court on 28.03.2014.
4. On an application moved by the Investigating Officer, the bank accounts of the petitioner were frozen. The case is also registered with the Court of Additional Sessions Judge vide Special (MPID) Case No. 2/2013. The said proceeding is still pending. On 07.01.2015, the present petitioner who is accused no.2 in the crime, moved an application before the learned Special Judge that an amount of Rs.50,000/- has been wrongly deposited in the account No.961510100018109 with the Bank of India. In the said application, it is asserted by the petitioner that the said amount of Rs. 50,000/- is deposited in the said account by his brother who is serving in Madhya Pradesh and the said amount of Rs.50,000/- was deposited by his brother for maintenance of his old aged ::: Uploaded on - 15/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/06/2017 00:59:49 ::: 3 crwp918.15.odt parents. The learned Judge rejected the said application on 31.12.2015. While rejecting the application, it was noticed by the learned Judge, after perusal of the record, that prior to deposit of the said Rs.50,000/- a paltry amount of Rs.853/- was shown as balance in the account.
5. Before this Court, a somersault is taken by the petitioner. It is submitted that the said amount of Rs.50,000/- was deposited by the mother of the petitioner for his personal use.
I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Judge of the Court below especially when the petitioner is approaching before two different Courts with two different reasons. The petitioner is accused of collecting huge amounts from the small depositors by alluring them to offer higher rate of interest.
In that view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged.
JUDGE kahale ::: Uploaded on - 15/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/06/2017 00:59:49 :::