Bombay High Court
Jayanand Shetty vs Union Of India And Anr on 3 February, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
:1: 4-i.ia-406-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.406 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.102 OF 2023
Jayanand Shetty ..... Applicant
Versus
Union of India & Anr. .... Respondents
-----
Mr. Sarthak Shetty, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.1-CBI.
Smt. M.R. Tidke, APP for the Respondent No.2-State.
-----
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 3rd FEBRUARY, 2023
P.C. :
1. This is an application for bail pending the
applicant's Criminal Appeal No.102/2023.
2. The applicant has challenged his conviction and
sentence recorded by the Special Judge for CBI, Greater
Bombay passed in CBI Special Case No.95/2000 on
20.12.2022. The applicant was the original accused No.9. He
was convicted for commission of offences punishable under
Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of
1 of 5
Deshmane(PS)
:2: 4-i.ia-406-23.odt
Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, 'P.C. Act') and under Section
120-B read with 420 of IPC. The major sentence imposed on
him was RI for one year besides imposition of fine.
3. Heard Shri Sarthak Shetty, learned counsel for the
applicant, Shri Kuldeep Patil, learned counsel for the
respondent No.1-CBI and Smt. M.R. Tidke, learned APP for the
respondent No.2-State.
4. The prosecution case is that there was an
agreement between the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (for
short, 'IOCL') and M/s. East West Airlines. The agreement was
that the Airlines was to fax copies of the Demand Drafts and
only on receiving those copies of the Demand Drafts, the fuel
of that value was supplied by the IOCL. The prosecution case
is that 29 Demand Drafts were fraudulently used by the
Airlines amounting to Rs.1.73 Crores. The modus operandi
was that after sending copies of those Demand Drafts through
fax, those Demand Drafts were cancelled. No money was
deducted from the account; and the IOCL did not receive any
amount. The fraud was to the tune of Rs.1.73 Crores.
2 of 5
:3: 4-i.ia-406-23.odt
5. The prosecution case is that the applicant was the
Assistant Branch Manager, Vijaya Bank, Brigade Road Branch,
Bangalore. Five Demand Drafts were issued from this bank out
of the 29 Demand Drafts, which were the subject matter of the
prosecution case. Out of those five demand drafts issued by
the applicant's bank, two demand drafts were having the same
serial number. It is also alleged that the commission for issuing
those Demand Drafts were not deducted from the account of
the Airlines. These are the allegations against the applicant.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that
on merits he has a good case. There is nothing to show that
there was conspiracy between the applicant and the beneficiary
i.e. M/s. East West Airlines. Nothing was recovered from the
applicant. PW-23 Anjana who was working in the same bank
has deposed that if one Demand Draft was cancelled then the
same number could be allotted to the other Demand Draft.
Learned counsel for the applicant relied on this observation
which is recorded by the learned Judge in paragraph No.47 of
his judgment.
3 of 5
:4: 4-i.ia-406-23.odt
7. Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that there
was nothing wrong in issuing two Demand Drafts of the same
number if one of them was cancelled. He further submitted
that the other allegation of not deducting the commission was
discarded by the learned Judge himself.
8. He further submitted that the applicant was on bail
during trial. The alleged period of the offence was in the year
1996. The applicant was on bail during trial for a long time.
Even after his conviction, he is granted bail under Section 389
of Cr.P.C. The applicant has not misused that liberty. There are
no antecedents against him. Therefore, bail may be granted.
9. Learned counsel for the CBI opposed these
submissions. According to him, the charges stand proved
against the applicant. The explanation offered by him is not
acceptable. Though there may not be direct evidence of
conspiracy, it is quite clear that without help of the applicant
the beneficiaries could not have got any benefit from those five
Demand Drafts.
4 of 5
:5: 4-i.ia-406-23.odt
10. I have considered all these submissions. The issues
raised by both sides will have to be decided at the final hearing
stage. The sentence imposed on the applicant is short. The
appeal is not likely to be decided within that period. The
applicant was on bail for a long period and there was no
allegation of misusing that liberty.
11. Considering all these aspects, the applicant can be
granted bail during pendency and final disposal of his Criminal
Appeal. Hence, the following order :
:: O R D E R ::
i. During pendency and final disposal of Criminal
Appeal No.102/2023, the applicant is directed to be
released on bail on his furnishing P.R. bond in the sum
of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with
one or two sureties in the like amount.
ii. Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.
Digitally signed
by
PRADIPKUMAR
PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE
DESHMANE Date:
2023.02.07
16:40:45
+0530
Deshmane (PS)
5 of 5
