1 4.25ABA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 950 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN NO. 4 OF 2025 RAHUL SUNIL CHAVAN VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANOTHER ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr.R.R.Karpe APP for Respondent-State : Mr.S.P.Sonpawale … CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 14.02.2025 P.C. : 1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State. 2] The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 1132/2024, registered with Shrirampur City Police Station, Tq. Shrirampur, District Ahmednagar, for the offence punisbale under Sections 420, 408 r/w. 34 of the IPC. 3] This Court, by order dated 15.01.2025, has granted interim protection in favour of the applicant for the submission and reasons noted in para nos.3, 4, and 5, as noted below : 3. The allegations against the applicant is that in the year 2022 when he sought loan from 2025:BHC-AUG:4403 2 4.25ABA the Bank he pledged certain goods i.e. cotton bales and secured loans. In the FIR, it is stated that, when the cotton bales were pledged, the cotton bales were of good quality. The applicant has also made certain part repayment of the loan. Thereafter, in the year 2023, the applicant had stopped making the repayment. As such, the Bank in order to recover the outstanding dues wanted to sell the cotton bales and on subsequent inspection of the cotton bales it was found that the cotton bales are of inferior quality. It is alleged that the applicant has somehow replaced the good quality of originally pledged cotton bales with inferior cotton bales. As such, the Bank is at a receiving hand and do not have any valuable security to recover it’s outstanding dues. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that, prima facie, the cotton bales which are given in possession of the warehouse, which is the agency of the Bank were of goods quality. Prima facie, there is no evidence that such large quantity of cotton bales have been moved out of the warehouse. He further submits that the quality of the cotton bales have to be maintained by the warehouse keepers in terms of the contract the bank has with the warehouse. He submits that in absence of any evidence, that the applicant has removed the cotton bales from the warehouse, no liability can be fastened on the applicant. No accusation can be made against the present applicant that the applicant has replaced cotton bales. He submits that the applicant has no access to the warehouse. The warehouse is maintained by a completely independent body i.e. the Central Warehouse Corporation. In absence of evidence showing that the cotton bales were removed from the warehouse by the applicant, the only inference that can be drawn is that, the cotton bales have deteriorated in quality in the warehouse and the warehouse corporation has not taken proper care of the cotton bales. 5. Considering the prima facie submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and 3 4.25ABA considering that the learned APP has no prima faice evidence that the cotton bales were removed from the ware house, prima facie, the applicant cannot be held responsible for deterioration of the quality of the cotton bales or for substitution of good cotton bales with inferior quality cotton bales. More so, the Bank made submission that the deposited goods were of good quality and substantiated by the certificate of cotton association and the same having been verified by the concerned Bank officials, so also, officials of the warehouse. 4] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that in pursuance of the order dated 15.01.2025, the applicant has attended the concerned police station and has co-operated with the investigation. 5] Considering the same, interim protection granted by order dated 15.01.2025 stands confirmed, in the following terms : i] The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required by the investigating officer. ii] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. He shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case. iii] The applicant shall co-operate with the 4 4.25ABA investigation and also in the proceedings before the trial Court. 6] In the event, the applicant violates any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled. 7] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail application and the trial Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove. 8] The application stands disposed of. [ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE DDC