SATISH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the applications have been filed by the informant to challenge the order of bail granted to respondents No.4 and 5 in Criminal Bail Application No.692 of 2021 dtd. 20/9/2021 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Jalna, and bail granted by learned Additional Sessions Judge-5, Jalna to respondents No.2 to 7 in Criminal Bail Application No.361 of 2021, No.637 of 2021, No.638 of 2021 and No.643 of 2021, in connection with Crime No.113 of 2021 dtd. 8/6/2021, registered with Police Station Jafrabad, District Jalna, for the offence punishable under Sec. 166, 167, 193, 406, 409, 420, 434, 464, 468, 471, 474 r.w.34 of IPC.

(2.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. R. M. Deshmukh for applicant, learned APP Mr. A. M. Phule for respondent-State, and learned Advocate Mr. S. J. Salunke for respondents No.4 and 5 in ACB No.201 of 2021 and respondents No.2 to 7 in ACB No.130 of 2021.

(3.) It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the informant that the learned Additional Sessions Judge erred in observing that the role of the applicants i.e. present respondents No.4 and 5 in ACB No.201 of 2021 is similar to the role alleged to the Talathi and Circle Officer to whom already anticipatory bail has been granted. Ground of parity has been wrongly applied. Preparing false entries cannot be done as a part of official duty. A government officer has to be honest and should discharge his duties as per the law and rules. Merely because those persons are government servants and there is no question of their fleeing away, cannot be the ground to grant them anticipatory bail. The learned Additional Sessions Judge failed to consider that the offence has been committed in a designed manner and the mutation has been effected in respect of one Sunil Damu Hiwale and others. About 2 H 28 R land has been shown to be transferred in their names, and thereafter, they have raised either loan or disposed of the property. The respondents No.2 to 4 in ACB No.130 of 2021 were the then revenue officers who had taken part in the crime and respondents No.5 to 7 are those persons in whose name the land has been thereafter mutated. When such huge fraud has taken place, the bail ought not to have been granted to the respondents.