Narendra S/O Keshavrao Pimpale vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Sadar Nagpur ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 3668 Bom

Bombay High Court

Narendra S/O Keshavrao Pimpale vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Sadar Nagpur ... on 10 April, 2026

2026:BHC-NAG:5777-DB




              Judgment

                                                                         apl802.24

                                                1

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                          NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                       CRIMINAL APPLICATION APL NO.802 OF 2024

              Narendra s/o Keshavrao Pimpale,
              aged about 41 years, occupation:
              business, r/o plot No.23/A,
              North Ambazari Road, Near
              Panchasheel Library,
              Gandhinagar, Shankarnagar,
              Nagpur-440 010.                  ..... Applicant.

                                      :: V E R S U S ::

              1. The State of Maharashtra,
              through Police Station Officer,
              Police Station Sadar, Nagpur.

              2. Santosh s/o Baburao Gaikwad,
              aged about 44 years, occupation:
              Journalist, r/o RBI 21, Friends
              Colony, Gittikhadan, Nagpur.    ..... Non-applicant.
              ================================
              Shri F.T.Mirza, Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Sameer Sonwane, Shri
              A.A.Thakur, Shri A.Z.Mirza, Mrs.Shiba Thakur, Advocates for the
              Applicant.
              Shri A.M.Joshi, APP for Non-applicant No.1/State.
              ================================
              CORAM    : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
              RESERVED ON : 01/04/2026
              PRONOUNCED ON : 10/04/2026

              JUDGMENT

1. Heard. Admit. Heard finally by consent.

.....2/-

Judgment

apl802.24

2. By this application, the applicant is seeking quashing

of FIR in connection with Crime No.23/2022 registered with

non-applicant No.1 police station for offences under Sections

420, 465, 466, 467, 468, and 471 read with 34 of the IPC and

consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing RCC

No.2439/2022 pending before learned CJM, Nagpur.

3. The present applicant is accused No.30 in the said

crime.

4. The crime is registered on the basis of a report lodged

by non-applicant No.2 (the complainant) on 19.1.2022.

Initially, the name of the present applicant was not mentioned

in the FIR. Allegations in the FIR against co-accused Rahul

Khanna and some other unknown persons are that said co-

accused Rahul Khanna is indulged in preparing forged royalty

and distributing it to various persons, who illegally involved

in selling of sand and obtaining money from them.

.....3/-

Judgment

apl802.24

On the basis of the said report, the police have

registered the crime against other co-accused.

5. During investigation, the Investigating Officer has

recorded memorandum statements of various accused persons

and chain of various events is revealed. Thereafter, the

Investigating Officer has collected Forensic Audit Report.

During the investigation, he has seized 458 Electronic Transit

Passes (ETPs) generated from "Narsingpur Sand Ghat"

(Madhya Pradesh) used were used in sand excavation and

transportation from various Ghats adjacent to the Nagpur city.

The Investigating Officer has also seized vehicles and

conducted house search panchanama and found documents

relating to the sand business of "Devyani Enterprises" owned

by wife of co-accused Amol Khobragade. Thereafter, he has

collected letter from the District Mining Officer regarding fine

imposed upon the present applicant and involvement of the

present applicant was revealed.

.....4/-

Judgment

apl802.24

As per allegations, the present applicant and other co-

accused used to obtain forged ETPs from "Narsingpur Sand

Ghats", but the same were used to excavate the sand from

Auctioned Sand Ghats as well as Un-auctioned Sand Ghat

near Kanhan River situated adjacent to Nagpur city.

It was further revealed that ETPs of Madhya Pradesh

were used to gain Additional Transportation Time which

enabled them to extract transport sand multiple times on each

ETP from Auctioned Sand Ghats as well as Un-audctioned

Sand Ghats.

The Investigating Officer has arrested 22 accused and

filed supplementary chargesheet against them.

On the basis of the said report, the police have filed

supplementary chargesheet against the present applicant.

6. Being aggrieved with the same, the present applicant

approached this court on the ground that in fact, it was the

present applicant who is whistle blower informing the police

.....5/-

Judgment

apl802.24

machinery about illegal and unauthorized excavation of the

sand and, thereafter, the entire police machinery investigated

the matter and involvement of other co-accused was revealed.

Subsequently, on the basis of omnibus allegations, the

investigation was carried out and chargesheet was filed

against the present applicant.

7. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submitted

that in fact, the present applicant is whistle blower on whose

instance the entire investigation was carried out and co-

accused were arrested.

As far as the present applicant is concerned, except

statement of co-accused, there is absolutely no material to

connect the present applicant. The applicant is an Income Tax

Payer since the year 2011. Apart from that, he has

Proprietary firm namely "Shivay Buildcom" which had

received Work Orders from "Lokesh Infra Projects Private

Limited" on 27.10.2020 for amount of Rs.3,54,01,792/-. He

.....6/-

Judgment

apl802.24

has completed the said work and received payment of

Rs.1,09,00,000/- from time to time and balance amount is

still due from "Lokesh Infra Projects Private Limited." The

present applicant is also Partner in other firms in which he is

having 33.33% shares. The receipts of various amounts by

the present applicant or his firms are reflected in bank

accounts. Therefore, allegation, that the present applicant

has received huge cash amount, is also not sustainable. As

the present applicant is supporter and party worker and

working for Ex-Minister Shri Sunil Kedar, due to political

rivalry, he is implicated in the alleged offence. The present applicant

has no acquaintance with said co-accused Rahul Khanna and

there is no single call between him and said co-accused Rahul

Khanna. There are hardly 10 calls between Surendra

Sawarkar, and the present applicant, who is also one of co-

accused. As the present applicant is acquainted with Amit Rai

and, therefore, there are calls between him and said Amit Rai.

Except the acquaintance, he has no concern with said Amit

.....7/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Rai. Therefore, the contention of the prosecution, that as the

present applicant had received a call from co-accused Amit

Rai, there was a connection between the present applicant

and other co-accused, is not sustainable.

As far as statements of co-accused are concerned, the

same are not admissible and, therefore, the same cannot be

taken into consideration. Except a bald allegation, that

involvement of the present applicant is in preparation of

forged documents, there is absolutely no material to connect

the present applicant with the alleged crime.

Statements of various witnesses recorded during the

investigation also nowhere connect the present applicant

either with the alleged crime or with the other co-accused.

In view of that, learned Senior Counsel for the

applicant submitted that the present application deserves to

be allowed.

.....8/-

Judgment

apl802.24

8. In support of his contentions, learned Senior Counsel

for the applicant placed reliance on the decision of the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Venkatesh @ Chandra and

anr ETC vs. State of Karnataka, reported in 2022 LiveLaw

(SC) 387.

9. Per contra, learned APP for the State has strongly

opposed the said contentions and submitted that the present

applicant has moved an application to Patansawangi Police

Outpost. In view of the same, one Notice was given to him

informing him that there are no Operational Sand Ghats

within the jurisdiction of Saoner Police Station and he should

approach the concerned Revenue Department and the Mining

Department by making a complaint to the Saoner Tahsildar

and the District Mining Officer. After registration of the FIR

against co-accused Rahul Khanna, he was found to be

involved in issuing forged ETPs.

.....9/-

Judgment

apl802.24

After registration of the crime, the investigation started

rotating and involvement of the present applicant was

revealed, but only to distract attention of the investigating

agency, he preferred an application. He preferred that

application to restrain the similar illegal activities undertaken

by his business rivalry. The Investigating Officer has obtained

Forensic Audit Report and during the Forensic Audit, it

revealed that the present applicant has received huge

amounts of by various transactions. Crime No.23/2022 was

registered by Sadar Police Station in pursuance to the report

lodged by non-applicant No.2. As per said allegations, one

Rahul Khanna and other unknown persons were made

accused. Suspicion was raised against some unknown persons

also in the said report.

During the investigation, the Investigating Officer has

recorded various statements of witnesses including statement

of one Aniruddha Mandal. On the basis of the said statement,

involvement of the present applicant is revealed. The

.....10/-

Judgment

apl802.24

statement of this Aniruddha Mandal revealed manner in

which ETPs are obtained from the Sand Ghats in Madhya

Pradesh and misuse by the present applicant and other

accused persons for excavating sand from Ghats in

Maharashtra.

The investigating agency appointed a firm of

Chartered Accountants namely KND Associates on 1.11.2022

for conducting Forensic Audit of the material collected by it

during the course of the investigation. The said firm

submitted its Forensic Audit Report dated 2.9.2023 to the

investigating agency along with its covering letter dated

4.9.2023. The Forensic Audit Report runs into 525 pages. The

Forensic Audit Report also discloses involvement of the

present applicant in the alleged crime.

The CDRs of mobile calls between the present

applicant and the other co-accused are also collected, which

.....11/-

Judgment

apl802.24

also show frequent calls between the present applicant and

other co-accused Amit Rai.

Thus, the entire investigation papers discloses

involvement of the present applicant in the alleged offence.

He submitted that in view of the above, the application

deserves to be rejected.

10. Before entering into merits of the present case, it is

necessary to see considerations for considering application

under Section 482 of the CrPC.

11. The law relating to quashing of FIRs has been

explained by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of

Haryana and ors vs. Bhajan Lal and ors, reported in 1992

Supplementary (1) SCC 335 wherein principles have been

laid down which are required to be considered while

considering applications for quashing of the FIRs, which read

as under:

.....12/-

Judgment

apl802.24

"(a) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused;

(b) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investi- gation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code;

(c) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or 'complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused;

(d) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a

.....13/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code;

(e) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused;

(f) where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party;

(g) where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the

.....14/-

Judgment

apl802.24

accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

12. The law relating to quashing of the FIR was explained

by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of B.N.John vs. State

of UP, reported in MANU/SC/00/2025, as under:

"As far as quashing of criminal cases is concerned, it is now more or less well settled as regards to the principles to be applied by the court. In this regard, one may refer to the decision of this Court in State of Haryana Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors., 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 wherein this Court has summarized some of the principles under which FIR/complaints/criminal cases could be quashed in the following words:

"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under

.....15/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials,

.....16/-

Judgment

apl802.24

if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

           (3)    Where     the        uncontroverted
           allegations    made    in    the   FIR    or

complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and

.....17/-

Judgment

apl802.24

inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

.....18/-

Judgment

apl802.24

13. A perusal of the entire investigation papers, in the

light of allegations levelled against the present applicant,

shows that there is no dispute that the present applicant has

made an application to the Patansawangi Police Station

complaining unauthorized and illegal excavation of the sand.

Thereafter, the Patansawangi Police Station issued a letter to

the present applicant to approach the Revenue Department

and the Mining Department by making a complaint to the

Saoner Tahsildar and the District Mining Officer, Nagpur. In

the meantime, Crime No.23/2022 was registered pursuant to

the report lodged on 19.1.2022 by non-applicant No.2

alleging commission of the offence by one Rahul Khanna and

other unknown persons.

14. A perusal of the FIR would reveal that non-applicant

No.2 has specifically alleged that while he was commuting

on walkers street, near Japanese Garden, Sadar (which falls

jurisdiction of Sadar Police Station, Nagpur) on 19.1.2022, at

3:46 pm, he received a telephonic call by one Rahul Khanna

.....19/-

Judgment

apl802.24

regarding sand transport. Non-applicant No.2 has narrated

about fraud committed by said Rahul Khanna and obtaining

money from him by promising him of providing the sand

and also sent a receipt bearing No.5213211400 showing

royalty payment and ETPs mentioning transport vehicle

No.MH-40-Y/6550 owned by friends of non-applicant No.2

without even the vehicle being present physically at

"Dharampur Mine" in Madhya Pradesh. The registration of

the said FIR sets wheels of investigation rotating. During the

investigation, the Investigating Officer has recorded various

statements of witnesses. During the investigation,

involvement of one Amit Rai was revealed. Truck bearing

No.MH-40-BL/7873 was seized on the basis of an

information given by said Amit Rai. During the

investigation, the Investigating Officer has recorded

statement of Aniruddha Mandal. On recording his

statement, it revealed to the investigating agency the manner

in which ETPs are obtained from Sand Ghats in Madhya

.....20/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Pradesh, which are misused by accused persons by

excavating sand from Ghats in Maharashtra and the said was

used for excavation as well as transporting the said sand

illegally and unauthorizedly. It was revealed during the

investigation that the present applicant is not only actively

involved in excavation and transportation of the sand

illegally but also he was found to be one of conspirators.

15. Admittedly, direct evidence would not be available to

show involvement of the present applicant as conspirator,

but circumstances on record, including statement of

Aniruddha Mandal and the Forensic Audit Report, disclosed

involvement of co-accused in the alleged crime as

conspirator. During the investigation, the Forensic Auditing

was done and during the Forensic Audit, it revealed that the

present applicant has received huge amount from the co-

accused during this transaction. During the Forensic Audit, it

was revealed that Amol Khobragade was Ghat Partner. The

present applicant is also Ghat Partner and other are family

.....21/-

Judgment

apl802.24

members of the present applicant and co-accused Amol

Khobragade. Amit Rai was shown to be Ghat owner. It was

further revealed that Amol Khobragade is shown to be

proprietor of "GSK Traders"; wife of said Amol Khobragade is

shown to be proprietor of "Devyani Enterprises; the present

applicant is shown to be proprietor of "Shivay Buildcom,"

"Ekdant Buildcom", and "M/s.Kedar Transport." The

daughter of the present applicant is shown to be proprietor

of "Sanjivani Infra" and "Pimpale Tuition Classes." Keshav

Pimpale who is father of the present applicant is shown to be

proprietor of "M/s.KNP Construction". Sushila Pimpale who

is mother of the present applicant is shown to be proprietor

of "Sushila Agro Farm." Amit Rai is shown to be proprietor

of Ghat owner, and Sharad Rai is shown to be proprietor of

"K.T.Traders." It was revealed that ETP for Sand Mine is pass

to every truck carrying the sand which is valid for specific

period i.e. 12 Hrs or 24 Hrs based on distance to be covered.

It is mandatory to mention source of sand extraction to sand

.....22/-

Judgment

apl802.24

delivery destination on ETP generated. ETC Number is

allotted to every such ETP which is unique. ETPs include (i)

unique ETP Number; (ii) source of sand in extraction to sand

delivery destination; (iii) vehicle number carrying sand; (iv)

buyer name; (v) driver details; (vi) limit of quantity truck-

wise that can be transported quantity of sand being

transported, and (vii) the owner of the truck, MRD

Registration Number etc.. The required mineral quantity is

booked in advance by paying royalty and other charges. Out

of this quantity, specified mineral is transported against

ETPs. The vehicle should be used to transport the mineral

quantity as per its loading capacity and it should not be

overloaded.

16. During the Forensic Audit, after preliminary study, it

was revealed to the Auditors that during the period of 2019-

2020 Financial Year to Financial Year 2022-2023, total

46153.72 brass quantity sand amounting to

.....23/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Rs.13,87,27,595/- was supplied. It was supplied through 16

trucks across the Maharashtra State and Madhya Pradesh.

It was supplied to 58 different concerned parties. It

was further revealed that ETPs for total 37,308.84 brass

quantity of sand supplied through 16 trucks amounting to

Rs.11.19 Crores (assuming Rs.3000/- per brass quantity, was

not generated out of 46,153.72 brass quantity sand supplied

amounting to Rs.13.87 Crores).

The said Audit Report mentions details of vehicle

number and the quantity of sand.

17. On evaluation of the bank statements of the present

applicant and his relatives, it reveals that sand supplied as

per confiscated data is Rs.13.87 crores. The sand supplied

identified in the Audit, on the basis of the receipts from sand

buyers in the bank statements of all the accused and

relatives, is Rs.36.17 Crores. Thus, there was a difference of

Rs.22.3 Crores.

.....24/-

Judgment

apl802.24

It further revealed that huge cash deposits of Rs.2.26

Crores is identified in Amit Rai's bank account during this

period and out of which major portion of cash is utilized to

to pay the Collector, Nagpur (Mining). Total receipts in the

bank statements of the accused and the relatives during

Financial Year 2019-2020 to Financial Year 2022-2023 were

majorly utilized towards property purchase, asset purchase,

jewellery purchase, personal expenditure, vendor payments,

and cash withdrawals. A huge transaction trail amounting to

Rs.9.24 Crores is identified between Amit Rai and other

accused and relatives between January 2021 to April 2021.

A consolidated fund flow for Financial Year 2019-

2022 of Amol Khobragade, the present applicant, Savita

Khobragade, Sharad Rai, Amit Rai, Lekhraj Rai, Shrutika,

Keshav, and Sushil Pimpale is also shown in the said Forensic

Audit Report. A huge amount of transaction between

January 2021 to April 2021 flowing from Amit and Rai's IDBI

Bank Account to the Collector, Nagpur (Mining), when

.....25/-

Judgment

apl802.24

further verified, found a trail of money transfers between the

present applicant and relatives, which is also shown in the

said Forensic Audit Report.

18. On comparison of forged ETPs with vehicles' GPS

Data, it revealed that by using 458 forged ETPs of

"Narsingpur Ghats" (Madhya Pradesh) qualifying to 4968

brass quantity of sand is identified, which the present

applicant and the other co-accused excavated and stolen

stand from 8 Auctioned Ghats and 16 other illegal places

adjacent to the Kanhan River, due to which loss of revenue

was of Rs.1.49 Crores. Based on analysis of the confiscated

data provided to the Forensic Auditors by the Crime Branch

Detection Centre, Nagpur, they came across list of around 58

parties who have brought sand amounting to

Rs.13,86,27,595/- between December 2018 to June 2022. It

was further revealed that on analysis of ETPs data provided,

ETPs of total 37,308.84 brass quantity out of 46,153.72 brass

.....26/-

Judgment

apl802.24

quantity was not generated. The conclusion of the Forensic

Audit is as follows:

"10. CONCLUSION

On analysis of the Data provided for Forensic Audit, we conclude that,

1. Total Sand supplied to different concerns & individuals by Devyani Enterprises (as identified from confiscated data) through their 16 trucks is 46,153.72 Brass Qty. amounting to approx. Rs. 13.87 crores. Out of which ETPs generated for sand supplied from Maharashtra and MP ghats is only for 8,844.88 Brass Qty. Therefore we conclude that ETPs for total 37,308.84 Brass Qty sand amounting to approx. Rs. 11.21 crores, is supplied without generating ETPs Refer Annexure II & II ABC.

2. On evaluation of the Bank Statements of Accused and their relatives, we understood that send actually supplied is more than the sand identified as supplied from data confiscated of Devyani Enterprises, refer below the summary of the same:

a. During the period FY 2019-20 to FY 2022-23. Refer Annexure II C, III & III A.

Particulars Amount Sand claimed to be Supplied as per 13.87 crores Confiscated Data(Refer Annх II С) II С))

.....27/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Sand actually Supplied (identified 36.17 crores on the basis of receipts from Sand Buyers in the Bank Statements of all the accused & relatives) Difference Data not 22.3 crores found/confiscated/ available with the 10-Also ETPs for Brass Qty sand supplied against this amount may not have been generated.

b. Further, huge Cash Deposits of Rs. 2.26 crores identified in Amit Lekhraj Rai Bank Accounts during period FY 2020-21 to FY 2021-22 out of which major portion of cash is utilised to pay to Collector Mining Nagpur. Refer Annexure III & III А..

c. Total Receipts in the Bank Statements of Accused and their relatives during the period FY 2019-20 to FY 2022-23 were majorly utilised towards Property Purchase, Asset Purchase (e.g., Car), Jewellery Purchase, Personal Expenditures, Vendor Payments, Cash Withdrawals etc., (Refer detailed fund flow on page no. 13 to understand further alongwith Annexure III & III B).

3. Properties of Total Amounting to Rs.3,52,50,000/-

were purchased by Narendra Pimple, Keshav Pimple, Shrutika Pimple and Savita Khorgade either as a co- owner or as a sole owner during the period FY 2019- 20 to FY 2022-23 from their Bank Accounts. Refer Annexure IV.

4. Find below, Income which is not reported in the In- come Tax Return during the period FY 2019-20 to FY 2022-23 (as available) as compared to receipts in the

.....28/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Bank Statements of respective accused or their rela- tives, as provided to us:

Name Total Income Total Under Receipts Reported in Receipts in Reported exclusively ITR from FY Bank Income in from Sand 2019 to FY Accounts Income Tax Buyers out of 2022 from FY Return Total 2019 to FY Receipts FY 2022 2019 to FY

Amol 30,18,800 98,69,215 68,50,415 79,11,167 Khorgade Savita 13,26,26,572 15,86,54,568 2,60,27,996 15,28,64,122 Khorgade (Devyani Ent) Narendra 1,95,44,670 5,31,90,189 3,,36,45,519 3,55,42,015 Pimple Keshav 40,22,740 1,04,47,824 64,25,084 24,09,557 Pimple (FY 2019 to FY 2021) Shrutika 53,97,574 1,14,25,620 60,28,046 84,12,690 Pimple Amit Lekraj 1,86,27,593 13,10,34,202 11,24,06,609 9,01,86,859 Rai (FY 2019 to FY 2021

Please note above comparison is based on availability of ITRs, if no Income Tax return is either filed or available or provided, then above receipts figures of the Bank Statements excludes those respective years of receipts in the Bank Accounts whose ITR is not available (as comparison can only be done for equal data). Further, Refer Page No.38, 39, 40 of this report.

.....29/-

Judgment

apl802.24

5. On comparison of E'TPs with Vehicle GPS data and sand data provided to us by respective Investigation Officer, we conclude that by using 458 forged ETPs of Narsingpur MP Ghat quantifying to 4968 Brass Qty of Sand, accused have excavated and stolen sand from 08 auctioned ghats and 16 other illegal places adjacent to Karhan river.

This in turn has lead to Loss of Revenue of approx. Rs.1.49 crores (assuming Rs.3,000/- per brass) to the Government. Refer Page no. 548-555."

19. Thus, the conclusion of the Forensic Audit shows that

total 37,308.84 brass quantity sand amounting to Rs.11.21

Crores is supplied without generating ETPs. On evaluation

of the bank statements of the present and his relatives, it

further shows that sand actually supplied is more than the

sand identified as supplied from the data confiscated of

"Devyani Enterprises" owned by Savita, who is wife of the

present applicant. It further shows that properties total

amounting to Rs.3,52,50,000/- were purchased by the

present applicant and his relatives either as co-owner or as

sole owner during the period Financial Years 2019-2020 to

2022-2023. The income is not mentioned in the Income Tax

.....30/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Returns during Financial Years 2019-2020 to 2022-2023 as

compared to receipts in the bank statements of the respective

accused or their relatives. The chart shows that the present

applicant has shown his total income for the Financial Year

2019-2022 is Rs.1,95,44,670/-. The total receipts in bank

statement accounts for the said years is Rs.5,31,90,189/-.

Thus, under reported income in the Income Tax Returns by

the present applicant is Rs.3,36,45,519/-. The receipts

exclusively from sand buyers out of total receipts for the

Financial Years 2019-2022 by the present applicant is

Rs.3,55,42,050/-. Similarly, the father of the present

applicant has shown his income in the Income Tax Return for

the above said period as Rs.40,22,740/-. His total receipts of

the bank accounts for the said period is Rs.1,04,47,824/-,

under reported income is Rs.64,25,084/- and receipts

exclusively from sand buyers out of total receipts for the said

years are as Rs.24,09,557/-. The daughter of the present

applicant has shown her income as Rs.53,97,574/- in the

.....31/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Income Tax Returns for the above said period. The bank

receipts in the bank accounts are as Rs.1,14,25,620/-, under

reported income is as Rs.60,28,046/- and receipts exclusively

from sand buyers out of total receipts for the above said

period is as Rs.84,12,690/-.

20. Thus, on comparison of ETPs with vehicles' GPS Data

and Sand Data provided to the Forensic Audit, it revealed

that by using 458 forged ETPs of "Narsingpur Sand Ghats"

(Madhya Pradesh) quantifying to 4968 brass quantity of

sand, the accused have excavated and stolen sand from 8

Auctioned Ghats and 16 other illegal places adjacent to the

Kanhan River and loss caused to the Government is Rs.1.49

Crores.

21. Thus, involvement of the present applicant, on the

basis of Forensic Audit, is revealed during the investigation.

.....32/-

Judgment

apl802.24

22. The present applicant is charged for offences under

Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, and 471 read with 34 of

the IPC.

23. As far as offence under Section 420 of the IPC is

concerned, ingredients of offence of cheating described under

Section 415 of the IPC are that, whoever, by deceiving any

person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so

deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent

that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally

induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything

which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived,

and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage

or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property,

is said to "cheat".

24. To hold a person guilty of "cheating" as defined under

Section 415 of the IPC, it is necessary to show that he had

.....33/-

Judgment

apl802.24

"fraudulent" or "dishonest" intention at the time of making a

promise with an intention to retain the property.

25. In other words, Section 415 of the IPC which defines

"cheating", requires; (1) deception of any person; (2)(a)

fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person- (i) to deliver

any property to any person; or (ii) to consent that any person

shall retain any property; or (b) intentionally inducing that

person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or

omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission

causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in

body mind, reputation or property.

26. In the light of the above definition, especially in the

backdrop of the Forensic Audit Report, the "dishonest

intention" of the present applicant reveals. The allegations

against the present applicant and the other co-accused, that

they have prepared forged ETPs, also reveals from the

.....34/-

Judgment

apl802.24

Forensic Audit Report as the said Forensic Audit Report

discloses that 458 forged ETPs were used.

27. Thus, the offence under Section 467 is also made out

against the present applicant.

28. What role exactly is played by the present applicant, is

a matter of evidence.

29. Considering the Forensic Audit Report, statement of

Aniruddha Mandal and various documents seized during the

investigation, on the basis of the statement of the co-accused,

which is recorded in view of Section 27 of the Indian

Evidence Act, and various facts are discovered at the instance

of the co-accused, involvement of the present applicant

reveals in the alleged incident.

30. By applying parameters laid down by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in the case of State of Haryana and ors vs. Bhajan Lal

and ors supra, the material collected during the investigation

is sufficient to frame the charge against the present

.....35/-

Judgment

apl802.24

applicant, at this stage. A prima facie case is made out

against the present applicant and, therefore, the application

being devoid of merits is liable to be rejected and the same is

rejected.

Application stands disposed of.

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)

!! BrWankhede !!

Signed by: Mr. B. R. Wankhede Designation: PS To Honourable Judge ...../- Date: 15/04/2026 10:04:49