REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Vitthal Bhagaji Tandale Appellant

V/S

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

PRAHLAD SINGH BHATI VS. N.C.T. OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
RAM GOVIND UPADHYAY VS. SUDARSHAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. AMARMANI TRIPATHI [REFERRED TO]
PRASANTA KUMAR SARKAR VS. ASHIS CHATTERJEE [REFERRED TO]
Y.S. JAGAN MOHAN REDDY VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [REFERRED TO]
AJWAR VS. WASEEM AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
DOLAT RAM VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
NIRANJAN SINGH VS. PRABHAKAR RAJARAM KHAROTE [REFERRED TO]
VILAS PANDURANG PAWAR AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
ATULBHAI VITHALBHAI BHANDERI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
TARUN KUMAR VS. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [REFERRED TO]
MANIK MADHUKAR SARVE VS. VITTHAL DAMUJI MEHER [REFERRED TO]
CHAMAN LAL VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
KALYAN CHANDRA SARKAR VS. RAJESH RANJAN alias PAPPU YADAV [REFERRED TO]
MASROOR VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
NEERU YADAV VS. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]
ANIL KUMAR YADAV VS. STATE (NCT) OF DELHI & ANR. [REFERRED TO]
MAHIPAL VS. RAJESH KUMAR @ POLIA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has approached this Court seeking regular bail in connection with FIR dtd. 17/1/2025 bearing Crime No. 13 of 2025 registered with Jinsi Police Station, Dist. Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar for the offences punishable under Ss. 318(4), 316(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alongwith Ss. 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interests of Depositors Act.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that complainant Sartaj Singh Arjan Singh Chahal, a 61-year-old retired Deputy Engineer, involves a coordinated investment fraud orchestrated by the Quick Start 24 Group (Inlife Capsure LLP). In February 2023, the complainant was induced by his Bank Manager Vinod Sant, to invest in the aforementioned company, which promised a 3% monthly dividend.

(3.) Following this recommendation, the complainant met Branch Manager Sheetal Motinge at the Jalna Road office in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, where she presented deceptive advertisements and newspaper clippings to establish the company's false legitimacy. Motinge and Vitthal Tandale, manager of the N-7 CIDCO branch, acted under the direction of the company owners, Harshal Yogeshbhai Gandhi and Prateek M. Shah, based in Ahmedabad.

Click here to view full judgment.

VITTHAL BHAGAJI TANDALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address