LAWS(BOM)-2022-5-48

SUMAN KANIFNATH GAWALI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On May 04, 2022
Suman Kanifnath Gawali Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.60 of 2022 registered with MIDC Waluj Police Station, Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad for the offence punishable under sec. 405 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Heard Mr. S.J. Salunke, learned Advocate for the applicant and Mr.B.V. Virdhe, learned APP for the respondent/State. In order to cut-short, it can be stated that both of them have vehemently made submissions in support of their respective contentions.

(3.) The learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the FIR has been lodged by the Human Resource Officer of ESS-DEE Industries. Upon audit they found that there is some problem with the quantity of raw material. Then inquiry was made and it was revealed that one Kanifnath Gawali who is Assistant Manager with the said company is involved in the activity. Kanifnath's wife Suman i.e. present applicant, one Amol Pratap Kulkarni and some employees, who had left the company have started one company by name IMR Industries and they have grabbed the raw material as well as finished product of ESS-DEE Industries, thereby causing them loss worth Rs.12.00 to 15 lakhs. The applicant has produced on record the documents of her company and also the tax invoices from ESS-DEE Industries to one Jay Bhagwan Engineering Works and other companies. The payments have been made by present applicant in respect of her business. It is not that the present applicant was taking raw material from same company, which was supplying the material to ESS-DEE Industries. But they have purchased raw material from other companies also. No offence has been committed by present applicant and similarly situated persons were granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Ad-interim protection was granted to present applicant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. She has attended the police station and even given written statement about the affairs of her business. Now custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. She is ready to abide by the terms of the bail.