AJAYKUMAR SACHIDANAND MISHRA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr.L.R.Pujari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the application is being heard and finally decided today.

(2.) This application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail in connection with FIR, being C.R.No.I-18 of 2009, registered with Vapi Udyognagar Police Station, Vapi Town, for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 474, 484, 485 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that the applicant and other accused persons (five in number), are involved in the commission of the above-mentioned offences involving hatching and executing a conspiracy, whereby the complainant was induced to part with a huge sum of money, to the tune of about 8,73,40,000/-, in cash, cheques and Demand Drafts, a substantial part of which ultimately came to be deposited in the Bank account of accused No.1, who transferred it to the account of accused No.2. The allegation against the applicant is that two Drafts received by Dena Bank,Vapi Branch, where the applicant was working as Manager have been transferred and credited to the Bank account of accused No.1 at Zampa Bazar Branch, Surat, instead of putting them into the Suspense Account of the Bank. It is further the case of the prosecution that the applicant is involved in hatching a conspiracy with the other accused persons, whereby the complainant was assured that Dena Bank has charge over certain property which is to be auctioned by an order of the High Court of Gujarat. The investigation revealed that the said order of the High Court of Gujarat is a forged and fabricated one, on which even the signatures of the Hon'ble Judge, who is purported to have passed the order, as well as the Assistant Registrar of the High Court, have been forged. According to the prosecution, it is on the basis of the above order that the complainant and two others were assured by the accused persons that they would be given charge of the property after making payment. In this manner the complainant was made to part with an amount of about Rs.8,73,40,000/- in cash, Demand Drafts and cheques, which came to be deposited in the account of accused No.1.