SUDHIR versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Citation: [2015] 12 S.C.R. 387 · Decided: 01-10-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 12 S.C.R. 387 
SUDHIR 
v. 
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAANDANOTHER 
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 1286-1287of2015) 
0CTOBER 01, 2015 
[DIPAK MISRA AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.] 
A 
8 
Bail - Anticipatory bail - A/legations of criminal 
misappropriation of public funds released for rural c 
development against the appellants - Registration of FIR -
Application for anticipatory bail by the appellants- Grant of, 
by the trial court - However, cancelled by the High Court -
Interference with - Held: Not called for - Considering the 
gravity of the offence, circumstances of the case, particularly, . D 
the allegations levied against the appellants and the conduct 
of the appellants and the fact thatthe investigation is held up 
as the custodial interrogation of the appellants could not be 
done due to the anticipatory bail, the High Court rightly 
cancelled the anticipatory bail granted to the appellants by E 
the Additional Sessions Judge. 
Shri Gurbaksh Signh Sibbia and others v. State 
of Punjab 1980 (3) SCR 383: (1980) 2 SCC 565; 
Ravindra Saxena v. State of Rajasthan 2009 (16) 
F 
SCR 433: (2010) 1 SCC 684; State of A. P v. 
Bimal Krishna Kundu and another 1997 (4) Suppl. 
SCR 412: (1997) 8 SCC 104; Siddharam 
Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and 
others 2010 (15) SCR: (2011) 1 SCC 694; 
G 
Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth v. State of Gujarat and 
another 2015 (9) Scale 403- referred to. 
H 
387 
388 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 12 S.C.R. 
Case Law Reference 
1980 (3) SCR 383 
referred to. 
Para 7, 9 
2009 (16) SCR 433 
referred to. 
Para 7,8 
1997 (4) Suppl. SCR 412 
referred to. 
Para 10 
• 
2010 (15) SCR 201 
referred to. 
Para 11 
2015 (9) Scale 403 
referred to. 
Para 12 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal 
Appeal Nos. 1286-1287 of 2015 
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.01.2015 of the 
High Court of Ju9icature at Bombay, Bench atAurangabad in 
Criminal Applications No. 4527 and 4529 of 2013 
WITH 
Crl. A. Nos. 1288 and 1289 of 2015 
Venkita Subramoniam T. R., Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, 
Vatsalya Vigya for the Appellant. 
Siddesh Kotwal, Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar 
for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
PRAFULLA C. PANT, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. All these four appeals are directed against common 
G order dated 29.1.2015, passed by the High Court of Judicature 
at Bombay, BenchAurangabad, in Criminal Application Nos. 
4526 of 2013, 4527 of 2013, 4528 of 2013 and 4529 of 2013 
whereby anticipatory bail granted by the Additional Sessions 
H Judge, Jalgaon, to the appellants in connection with C.R. Nos. 
SUDHIR-v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
389 
[PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.] 
71 of 2013 and 73 of 2013, registered at Polica Station A 
Dharangaon, relating to offences punishable under Sections 
409, 420, 467, 468, 477 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal 
Code (IPC) and under Section 13(1 )(d) read with Section 13(2) 
of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, is cancelled. 
3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and 
perused the papers on .ecord. 
s· 
4. Brief facts of the case are that appellants Chandrkant 
Wagh and Sudhir Dahake are Executive Engineer and c . 
Sectional Engineer respectively in Rural Water Supply 
Department of Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. Two First Information 
· Reports were registered against them with the serious 
allegations of criminal misappropriation of funds released for 
implementation of schemes of drinking water in the villages of D 
Waghlud and Sonwad Khurd in Tehsil Dharangaon. C.R. No. 
71 of2013 relates to Waghlud and C.R. No. 73 of2013 relates 
to village Sonwad Khurd. The FIRs in respect of these crimes 
appeared to have been registered only after enquiries were 
made under directions of Revenue Commissioner, by Deputy E 
Commissioner (Development), Nasik Region, who found 
substance in the allegations against the c:ippellants. In C.R. 
No. 71 of 2013 there is allegation of misappropriation of 
Rs.28.35 lacs, and in C.R. No. 73 of2013 the allegations relate 
to misappropriation of Rs.13.75 lacs. In respect of village 
F 
Waghlud one Mangal Ganpat Patil was shown as contractor, 
but no such contractor was found in existence. Vouchers 
shown regarding payment of Rs. 14.94 lacs were found false, 
which related to construction of overhead water tank in 
Waghlud village which was already in existence in said village G 
under another scheme. The amount of first installment of 
Rs.1.43 lacs and second installment of Rs.1.44 lacs for 
construc
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.