[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.2562 OF 2008 Sachin Girish Shah ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.Ujwal Agandsurve Advocate for Applicant Mr.K.V.Saste APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : AUGUST 26, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 26, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 26, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in CR No.151 of 2008 of Oshiwara Police Station, Mumbai. The said case is mainly under Sections 420, 406, 465, 467, 471 r.w. 120(b) r.w. 34 of IPC. 3. The complainant has stated that daughter Vina and sister Ranjana of the complainant wanted to do MBBS in the academic year 2005-06. The applicant promised the complainant that he would get the daughter and sister of the complainant admission in MBBS in MGM Medical College, Navi Mumbai. He demanded Rs.10 lakhs from each of them. On the complainant stating that she could not pay the said [-2-] amount, it was stated that Rs.8 lakhs would be given by each of the girls. Thereafter an amount of Rs.4,25,000/- and Rs.5,15,000/- was given by the complainant and her sister Ranjana to the applicant in the month of July, 2005. Thereafter further amounts were paid by the complainant and her sister Ranjana to the applicant by cheques. On 27.10.2005, the applicant called the complainant and her sister to his office and he told them that he had paid the admission fees of Vini in MGM Medical College, Navi Mumbai by Demand Draft and the College had issued him a confirmation letter. The applicant then asked the complainant to pay the balance amount, hence, balance amount was paid by means of cheques. However, though the complainant waited for about three months, no admission was given to her daughter and her sister. When they met the applicant, applicant informed them that the admissions are little delayed, however, he assured them that in the academic year 2006-07, he would definitely get the admission for the girls. 4. Thereafter, the applicant returned the amount of Rs.15 lakhs to the two girls by cheques. However, the said cheques were not honoured. The [-3-] applicant assured that he would return the amount. However, the complainant came to know that the applicant had cheated four other persons in a similar fashion. The said persons are 1) Shri.Anil Shindkar, 2) Dr.Shri.Ashok Budrana, 3) Shri.Rajesh K.Shah and 4) Dr.Shri.Hemant Pavankumar. Hence, complaint came to be filed. In the present case, the investigation is going on. It is necessary to see as to who else was cheated by the applicant in a similar manner. 5. Looking to the above facts and the fact that the investigation is going on, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. The application is rejected. 6. Liberty is granted to the applicant to prefer a fresh application for bail before the Sessions Court after the charge sheet is filed. In case such, such application is filed, the learned Sessions Judge shall hear the matter afresh and dispose it of on merits without being influenced by any observations in this order. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]