Final Order 1

Pdf Text: Notice No. : 715/N/2018. ~1~
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
66TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
Notice No. : 715/N/2018. Powai Police Station.
Arjun Mahadev Ghaitadke. … Applicant.
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
Through Powai police station. ...Respondent.
ORDER BELOW EXH.1
Read the application, say of Powai police station
at (Exh.4) , say of accused at (Exh.6). Heard Ld. counsels
for both parties at length.
2. It reveals that, applicant has made this
application for return of cash amount of `.12,00,000/
(`.Twelve Lacs Only), which was seized by Powai police
station in C.R. No. 140 of 2018, P.U.S. 384, 504 r/w. 34 of
Indian Penal Code. It is his submission that, he is employee
of Hiranandani group of companies. He registered above
said crime against the accused for blackmailing and
extortion of `.10,00,000/ ( `.Ten Lacs Only) from
Hiranandani company. Accused further made extortion
demand of `.20,00,00,000/ ( `.Twenty Croers Only),
further matter was reported to concern police station,
accordingly he was trapped and at the time of trapping
`.02,00,000/ ( `.Two Lacs Only). Notes were given by the
-- 1 of 5 --
Notice No. : 715/N/2018. ~2~
applicant and same were noted down. Applicant stated
that, amount of `.02,00,000/ ( `.Two Lacs Only) instantly
recovered from him and `.10,00,000/ ( `.Ten Lacs Only)
recovered from his house. Therefore, he is entitled to
recover `.12,00,000/ ( `.Twelve Lacs Only), he is ready to
abide by any conditions imposed by court, therefore, prayed
to return the same.
3. Say of concern police station submitted,
informant himself arranged `.2,00,000/ ¼`.Two Lacs Only½
at the time of trapping, accordingly panchnama was drawn.
Further, stated `.10,00,000/ ¼`.Ten Lacs Only½ towards
extraction was given to accused and which was produced by
the accused on 15/03/2018, at last prayed for not to hand
over amount to applicant.
4. Accused in his reply (Exh.6) strongly opposed
for the claimed of the applicant, come with case that, it is
not maintainable and in bad in law. He stated that, he is
innocent, informant is influential person, after resigning of
his job from the said company, company blackmailed him
for extracting money. Alleged recovery of `.10,00,000/
¼`.Ten Lacs Only½ is hard earning, which was handed over
to police, as they called him and asked to pay the amount to
save himself from Judicial Custody, his family has arranged
above said amount. Further, said that, applicant has not
-- 2 of 5 --
Notice No. : 715/N/2018. ~3~
provided above said amount or not arranged for above said
amount, was handed over to applicant, great difficulty was
caused to him, prayed to reject the application. He further
prayed to fix deposit the said amount in bank, alternative to
pray for direct applicant to furnish bank guarantee, if his
prayer considered.
5. If considered submission made by both parties,
gone through material available on record, Ii is not disputed
fact that, at the time of trapping accused, informant has
provided `.2,00,000/ ¼`.Two Lacs Only½ to the police
authority, accordingly accused was trapped and said
amount was recovered from him. Latter on reveals that, in
all `.10,00,000/ ¼`.Ten Lacs Only½ were recovered from the
accused, in all `.12,00,000/ ¼`.Twelve Lacs Only½ were
recovered from the accused in this crime and same has
claimed by the applicant to which accused has strongly
opposed and alternate prayed for bank guarantee.
6. If considered this fact at the time of alleging
report and trapping the alleged accused an amount of
`.2,00,000/ ¼`.Two Lacs Only½ was handed over to
informant. It is alleged by the applicant that previously he
handed over `.10,00,000/ ¼`.Ten Lacs Only½ to the accused
and same was produced by him, latter on during
investigation. It is claimed by the accused that all the
-- 3 of 5 --
Notice No. : 715/N/2018. ~4~
money belongs to him. If considered this fact, on two
occasions amount is recovered, firstly at the time of trapping
and latter on during investigation. I am of view that, prima
facie the applicant is entitled to receive the amount of
`.2,00,000/ only, when he provided the same to police
authority for trapping accused.
7. So far as other `.10,00,000/ are concern, same
recovered during investigation, the accused claimed his
right over that amount. Though, it is not appropriate at this
juncture to return the same to applicant, even accused has
expressed no objection to hand over, after furnishing bank
guarantee. Considering all these above discussion
application required to be allowed partly. Hence, I pass
following order.
ORDER
1 Application is partly allowed.
2 The Sr. P. I. of Powai police station, is hereby
directed to return amount of `.2,00,000/
(`.Two Lacs Only) to the applicant on following
condition :
a Applicant shall furnish bank guarantee of
`.2,00,000/ ( `.Two Lacs Only).
-- 4 of 5 --
Notice No. : 715/N/2018. ~5~
b Applicant shall produce the said cash amount, as
and when required by the Court or Investigation
Officer.
c Investigation Officer shall noted denomination of
said cash amount for its proper identification in
future.
d Investigation Officer is directed to deposit the
seized cash amount of `.10,00,000/ ( `.Ten Lacs
Only).
e Copy to the concerned police station for
compliance of this order.
Date :04/12/2018.
SRD
Sd/
(R. M. Nerlikar)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
66th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 5 of 5 --