• Rakesh Baban Borhade Vs. State of Maharashtra

  • Head Notes

    Indian Penal Code, 1860- Chapter-XVII- Sections-420 IPC

    [Anticipatory Bail Judgments]

    Anticipatory bail- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973- S-438- By depositing Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rs. One Crore)- Dispute between parties purely a business transaction- Penal Code, 1860- Sections 420, 406, 423, 424 & 34 - Anticipatory bail - Dispute purely commercial transaction, Bona fide conduct of applicant, Grant of - Prosecution case arose out of a private complaint filed by a company alleging commission of offences against appellant and other accused u/s 420, 406, 423, 424 r/w Section 34 IPC - High Court dismissed anticipatory bail applications filed by appellant while granting anticipatory bail to two other persons arrayed as accused in same case - Appeal - Held, dispute between parties purely a business transaction based on MOUs - Since transaction in nature of commercial transaction and since appellant had also shown his bona fide by depositing an amount (in compliance of direction of court for interim protection from arrest), pending further investigation, anticipatory bail is granted to appellant - Appeal allowed - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 438(1).- Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (2011) 1 SCC 694, Relied on (Para 9, 10 & 11)- Further Held: The dispute between the parties revolves around MOU dated 21.12.2005 and the previous MOU dated 3.2.2005. The dispute is purely a business transaction based on the said MOUs. According to the appellant-accused, he sold the land belonging to his father in Survey No.75/18 to M/s. Siddhivinayak Enterprises by sale deed dated 31.12.2007 as legal representative of his father and there is no illegality involved in it. Whether the appellant-accused has sold the property to M/s. Siddhivinayak Enterprises in his capacity as the legal heir of his father or as a representative of the company and whether there was any dishonest intention to cheat the complainant remains to be seen only when the parties adduce oral and documentary evidence (Para 9)- When the Special Leave Petitions came up for hearing, by order dated 9.5.2014 interim protection from arrest was granted to the appellant-accused and without prejudice to the contentions, the appellant was directed to deposit a sum of rupees one crore in the Registry of the Supreme Court and in compliance of the said order, the appellant has deposited rupees one crore. Since the transaction is in the nature of commercial transaction and since the appellant has also shown his bona fide by depositing rupees one crore, pending further investigation, anticipatory bail could be granted to the appellant (Para 10)-Judgments- Rakesh Baban Borhade Vs. State of Maharashtra, Crl. Appeal Nos. 2446-2447/2014, Judgment Dated-19/11/2014, Bench-V. Gopala Gowda & R. Banumathi, JJ, Citations- 2015(2) SCC 313: 2014(13) JT 131: 2014(13) SCALE 93: 2014(8) Supreme 65: 2014(10) SLT 129: 2014(4) Crimes 269(SC).

Live2Support.com
All original content on these pages is fingerprinted and certified by Digiprove