Rakesh S/O Ramchandra Warpatkar vs The State Of Maharrashtra, ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 3172 Bom

                                                    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.

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

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