ABA-470-2025.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 470 OF 2025 Ravindra Kashinath Patil VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Mr. V. B. Patil, Advocate for applicant Mr. S. B. Narwade, APP for Respondent-State ... CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J DATE : AUGUST 21, 2026 P. C. : 1. The Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime No. 0258 of 2024, registered on 23.09.2024, at the Shindkheda Police Station, District Dhule for offences punishable under sections 417, 420, 465, 468, 471, 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). 2. It is the case of the prosecution that the First Information Report lodged by the Extension Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Shindkheda, Santosh Kisan Savkare, alleges a systematic financial fraud in the implementation of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) scheme at Varul-Ghusare, Taluka Shindkheda District Dhule. While working as Gramasevak, the present applicant allegedly diverted state housing 2026:BHC-AUG:38436 ABA-470-2025.odt funds by manipulating scheme approvals. He created bogus beneficiary profiles, disbursed government funds to dummy individuals using dead persons names, and accepting old photos as proof for fake claims. Thus, crime was lodged and chargesheet came to be filed. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application filed by the present applicant was rejected by Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule vide order dated 22.01.2025. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that this is a case of deliberate implication. He further contends that disbursement of the funds was not the part of his duties and he has no role in the final payout. He contends that the allegations against present applicant are vague, omnibus and false. He submits that any misappropriation of public funds under the government scheme could not have occurred without the active negligence on the part of the field officer for preparing primary records. He argued that the crime was falsely registered against the the present applicant who worked as Gramsevak merely to shield senior officials responsible for the wrongful disbursement of funds. Furthermore, he draws attention of the court to the fact that this was State Government Scheme where the executing agency with control and jurisdiction is the Panchayat Samiti, ABA-470-2025.odt whereas the Gram Panchayat merely acts as authority to submit the list of eligible candidates for further examination and disbursement by the Panchayat Samiti. He highlights that in the inquiry report found no misappropriation of funds took place and no funds credited to the present applicant’s account. He points out that the registration of the crime suffered from an unexplained delay, whereas the applicant himself informed the authorities about disqualified persons in 2019, the departmental inquiry was conducted in 2021, and the offence was registered three years later. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is unnecessary. 4. The learned APP vehemently oppose the grant of pre-arrest bail, contends that the applicant is involved in a grave white-collar economic offence committed during the period from 25.08.2021 to 20.12.2021, while functioning as the Gramsevak at Varul-Ghusare, Dist. Dhule. He submits that the delay in lodging the First Information Report occurred because the administrative staff were busy with election duties, which delayed the preliminary departmental inquiry. He highlighted that the applicant failed to give a satisfactory reply to the show-cause notice issued by the Block Development Officer on ABA-470-2025.odt 20.12.2021 regarding financial irregularities under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana. He further points out major discrepancies between the letter sent by the applicant on 10.12.2019, which listed 13 ineligible beneficiaries, and the inquiry report, which identified 4 entirely different beneficiaries. Moreover, 15 transactions remain unexplained regarding the misappropriation of public funds. Therefore, custodial interrogation is necessary to investigate the financial misappropriation and specific role of the present applicant during his tenure as Gramsevak. 5. Perusal of the record shows that the Gram Panchayat’s role is recommending candidate lists and that the Gramsevak has no active involvement in the disbursement of funds. Being the Gramsevak at Varul-Ghusare District Dhule during the relevant period from 25.08.2021 to 20.12.2021, the applicant is directly responsible for verification and maintenance of primary records. Any improper disbursement of welfare funds necessarily begins with misrepresentation in the records prepared by the subordinate official. Thus, the present applicant cannot evade criminal accountability by shifting the entire blame onto subordinate officers at the Panchayat Samiti Level. Furthermore, the applicant’s defense regarding his letter ABA-470-2025.odt dated 10.12.2019 is not substasntiate when compared with the inquiry report. Rather than clarifying the fraud, his letter identified 13 ineligible beneficiaries, while the inquiry uncovered 4 completely different fake beneficiaries, with 15 transactions remaining unexplained. This clearly shows that deliberate suppression of facts. 6. Prima facie perusal of the record shows that the delay in lodging the First Information Report because of a procedural delay that does not absolve the present applicant from his failure to submit a satisfactory explanation regarding the misappropriation of public funds. Further, the record reveals that the applicant failed to offer any satisfactory explanation to the show cause notice dated 20.12.2021 issued by the Block Development Officer. 7. The alleged crime involves the systematic misappropriation of public welfare funds under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana. Economic offences regarding public money constitute a grave crime that affects society. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the present applicant is necessary to uncover the said financial fraud, to identify fake beneficiaries and determine the present applicant’s role as a Gramsevak in said crime. Page 5 of 6 ABA-470-2025.odt 8. In view of above, application stands dismissed. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) Malani