PANDURANG DHONDIRAM PATIL HUJURE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.40 of 2022, registered with Khultabad Police Station, District Aurangabad, for the offence punishable under Sec. 420 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) It will not be out of place to mention here that when the matter was on board on 25/3/2022, a statement was made on behalf of the applicant that in order to show his bonafides the applicant is ready to deposit amount of Rs.6,10,000.00 within a period of two weeks. In view of the said voluntarily statement, interim protection was granted, however, the applicant had not deposited the said amount. Thereafter, he changed the Advocate and when it was pointed out that the amount has not been deposited, the interim protection was not continued on 12/4/2022.

(3.) The learned Advocate now appearing for the applicant submits that in fact there appears to be some communication gap which had led to the statement by the Advocate earlier representing, in fact no amount was due from the applicant to the informant and there was no question of depositing any amount. Even if for the sake of argument it is accepted that some amount was due, that would have been cause of action on the civil side, but it cannot be said that it has led to the any action under criminal law. The applicant had taken contract for erecting jaggery manufacturing unit. The quotation that was given was for Rs.13,61,000.00. It was negotiated and it was then decided for Rs.12,75,000.00. According to the informant he has given amount of Rs.11,62,578.00 to the applicant, but that is not a correct figure. The applicant was the first person to raise the dispute by giving notice dtd. 6/10/2021 to the informant and he has given all the details. He had incurred about Rs.8,77,000.00 on the erection and remaining amount was to be paid by the informant itself. When that amount was demanded, the informant started saying as to where is the agreement. Threats were given, and due to the threats the applicant had not come to the place of site from Kolhapur. There is no question of cheating by the applicant. After the receipt of the said notice, it appears that the informant has concocted a story and then lodged the report. There is huge delay in lodging the report. The custodial interrogation is not necessary. He is ready to abide by the terms of the bail.