Bombay High Court
Arun S/O Sambhaji Meherkure vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pso, Ps ... on 6 August, 2024
2024:BHC-NAG:8686
1 40-ba-691-24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Criminal Application (BA) No. 691 of 2024
Arun S/o Sambhaji Meherkure
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through Police Station Officer, Police Station
Chimur, District Chandrapur
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
Shri R.P.Joshi, Advocate for the applicant.
Mrs. Harshada Prabhu, APP for the non-applicant/State.
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : 6th AUGUST, 2024.
By preferring this application, the applicant
is seeking bail under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
2. The applicant came to be arrested on 19 th
May, 2023 in connection with Crime No. 319 of 2022
registered under Sections 406, 408, 409, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 477-A, 120-B, read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Maharashtra
SKNair
2 40-ba-691-24.odt
Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial
Establishments) Act, 1999.
3. The accusation against the present applicant
is on the basis of report lodged by Rajesh Sudhakar
Landage who is an Auditor who observed the serious
irregularities in the day to day business of the society
and also ascertained that there is misappropriation of the
huge amount of Rs.7,95,35,833/-
4. As per the allegations the present applicant
was secretary for the period of 2012-17 and Vice
President from 2017-21. As per the allegations, the
Board of Directors and Office bearers of the society
namely Rashtrasant Tukdoji Nagri Sahakari Credit
Society Limited, Chimur have had the conspiracy and by
misusing their position while performing their duties
committed the misappropriation. It is alleged that the
present applicant who was initially the Secretary and
subsequently was Vice President is also involved in
misappropriation and the amount of Rs.6,62,814/- was
received by him by this misappropriation. Further
allegation against the present applicant is that he has not
deposited the said amount which was misappropriated
by him and he was also part of the conspiracy hatched by
the other office bearers and in presence of that
SKNair
3 40-ba-691-24.odt
conspiracy the deposits of the depositors were
misappropriated.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant Shri
R.P.Joshi submitted that as far as the allegation against
the present applicant is concerned on the basis of audit
report. In fact, no prima facie case is made out against
the present applicant as the audit report nowhere shows
any details regarding the said amount. He further
submitted that even for the sake of argument, the
allegations are taken as it is, further incarceration of the
present applicant is not required as the investigation is
already completed and the chargesheet is already filed.
He submitted that trial would take its own time for final
disposal and the applicant cannot be kept behind the bar
by way of punishment.
6. He further submits that now from the
investigation papers it reveals that even accepting the
allegations as it is, the amount of Rs.6,62,814/- is shown
against the present applicant. This Court has already
considered the bail application of the co-accused Atul
Meherkure and Amol Meherkure against whom more
serious allegations are levelled. He submitted that
considering the investigation is completed, the charge-
sheet is filed and in view of the tripod test laid down by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment of P.
SKNair
4 40-ba-691-24.odt
Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
[2019 SCC Online SC 1380] and P.Chidambaram Vs.
Directorate of Enforcement, [(2020) 13 SCC 791] , the
applicant shall be released on bail.
7. Per contra, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor strongly opposed said application by pointing
out that there is prima facie case against the present
applicant. The nature of the offence is economic
offence. The investigation has disclosed that the present
applicant was initially Secretary for the period 2012-17
and subsequently acted as a Vice President. During his
tenure, the scam was committed by hatching the
conspiracy between the Board of Directors and office
bearers. The various records pertaining to transfer
withdraw and daily records, it reveals the involvement of
the present applicant in the alleged offence. She
submitted that the nature of the offence is a serious
wherein public money is involved. If the applicant
released on bail, there is every possibility of tampering
the witnesses as well as he would not be available for
trial. In view of that the application deserves to be
rejected.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the
applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
the non-applicant/State. The entire investigation is
SKNair
5 40-ba-691-24.odt
based on the audit report. From the audit report, it
reveals that the present applicant who was Secretary is
involved in the misappropriation. The matter in which
the offence was committed can be explained by setting
an example that if the pigmy agent collects the amount
of Rs.47,540/- and out of the same, he used to deposit
Rs.41,340/- and he used to deposit the less amount. As
far as the present applicant is concerned, the allegation is
that he was acting as a Secretary and the deposits were
misappropriated by the present applicant as well as other
co-accused. Thus, the modus operandi reveals from the
audit report. Thus, the involvement of the present
applicant is revealed from the investigation papers and
the amount which was misappropriated by the present
applicant was Rs. 6,62,814/-. Admittedly, he has not
deposited the said amount after it was taken out from
the audit report. Audit report clearly discloses this fact
and shows the involvement of the present applicant in
the alleged offence. However, considering the
investigation is already completed and the charge-sheet
is already filed and other two accused against whom the
more serious offences are already released on bail. The
application of the present application deserves
consideration.
SKNair
6 40-ba-691-24.odt
9. Learned counsel for the applicant placed
reliance on P. Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court
has considered the tripod taste and held that as applicant
is not a flight risk and released him on bail. It is further
observed by the Honourable Apex Court while
considering the aspect of the economic offence that we
are conscious of the fact that the accused are charged
with economic offence of huge magnitude. We are also
conscious of the fact that the offences alleged, if proved,
may jeopardise the economy of the country. At the same
time, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the
investigating agency has already completed investigation
and the charge-sheet is already filed before the Special
Judge, CBI, New Delhi. Similar is the case in the present
case also. The investigation is already completed and
charge-sheet is filed and nothing in on record to show
that if applicant/accused is released on bail he will be at a
flight risk. The applicant is permanent resident of
Chimur, District Chandrapur and having permanent
abode there. The Honourable Apex Court in the case of
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation, [(2022) 10 SCC 51] wherein also
considered the aspect of the economic offence and by
referring the decision of P. Chidambaram v. Directorate
SKNair
7 40-ba-691-24.odt
of Enforcement (supra) and also by referring the another
decision in Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation [(2012) 1 SCC 40] wherein it is held that
we cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigating
agency has already completed investigation and the
charge-sheet is already filed.
10. Admittedly, the grant or refusal to grant bail
lies within the discretion of the court. The grant or
denial is regulated, to a large extent which depends upon
the facts and circumstances of each particular case. At
the same time, it is also well settled that the right to bail
is not to be denied merely because of the sentiments of
the community against the accused are there. The
primary purposes of bail in a criminal case are to relieve
the accused of imprisonment, the intention behind it
not to deprive him from his liberty and it cannot be by
way of punishment.
12. In view of that and considering that human
liberty is a precious constitutional right, the application
deserves to be allowed by imposing certain conditions.
Accordingly I proceed to pass following order :
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant - Arun Sambhaji Meherkure
in connection with Crime No.319/2022 registered
under Sections 406, 408, 409, 420, 465, 467 468, 471,
SKNair
8 40-ba-691-24.odt
477-A, 120-B, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of
Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act,
1999, be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety in the like
amount.
(iii) The applicant shall attend the police station
Economic Offence Wing, Chandrapur on first day of
every month, till the culmination of the trial.
(iv) The applicant shall attend the trial Court
regularly without seeking any exemption unless there are
exceptional circumstances.
(v) The applicant shall furnish his Cell phone
number and address with the address proof and the
names of two relatives along with their address proof.
(vi) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly
make any inducement and threat or promise to any
person acquainted with the facts of the present case.
13. Criminal application disposed of.
[URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.]
Signed by: Mr. S.K. NAIR
SKNair
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 08/08/2024 15:32:33
