IN THE COURT OF HONBLE SESSION COURT AT BOMBAY

BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2024

IN
FIR No-727 of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF
SECTION 409, 420 of
INDIAN PENAL CODE
IN
THE OFFENCE WAS
REGISTERED WITH
LT MARG POLICE
STATION IN C.R. NO.0727
OF 2023
KIRTI KUMAR OJHA )
Indian Inhabitant, Age 36 years, )
Res: Flat no. 603, Building No. 4, )
Bhaupadman Apart, Cabin-1, Opp, )
Shublabh Plaza, Indralok Ph-4, )
Ghodbunder Road, Thane, )
Thane – 400105. ) … Applicant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA )
(at the instance of L.T Marg Police ) … Respondent

TO,
THE HON’BLE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
OF THANE COURT AND HIS COMPANION
HON’BLE PUISNE JUDGES

THE HUMBLE APPLICATION OF THE APPLICANT

ABOVEDNAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:
1. The individual identified as the Applicant herein was arrested on
15th March 2024 from the Pali District and on 17th day of February
2024, as per the directive of the L.T Marg Police Station, in
correlation with First Information Report (F.I.R) Number 727 of the
year 2023. The charges brought against the Applicant are
purportedly under sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. In
support of this submission, a copy of the aforementioned F.I.R and
Remand Report has been appended herewith and is denoted as
Exhibit-"A" for the esteemed consideration of this Honourable
Court.
2. The aforementioned Applicant was apprehended on the 17th day of
February 2024 and subsequently brought before this Honorable
Court This Honorable Court, exercising its discretion, extended PCR
for the purpose of investigation until the 22nd day of February 2024.
Following a period of adequate police custody, the Honorable Court,
upon due consideration, granted MCR, as of the present moment,
the Applicant is detained within the confines of Arthur Jail under
the custodial jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.
3. After the Applicant presented the Bail application before the
Honourable Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) court and
subsequent to due deliberation, the Honourable JMFC Court
deemed it fit to dismiss the Bail Application. Dissatisfied with the
decision rendered by the Learned JMFC, the Applicant has now
opted to file the Bail application before this Honourable Court for
further consideration and adjudication. Hereto the Copy of the Bail
order is annexed and Marked as “Exhibit-B” for the perusal of this
Honble Court.
THE STORY OF PROSECUTION IS THAT:
1. The informant has deposed in the First information report (FIR)
that he is actively involved in the manufacturing of gold
ornaments and maintains a manufacturing facility at the address
specifically delineated in the aforementioned FIR. Additionally,
the informant has explicitly asserted in the FIR that he conducts
the sale of gold ornaments at wholesale rates through his
business establishment located in Zaveri Bazar, Mumbai, catering
specifically to jewelers engaged in the trade.
2. The informant, in additional testimony within the First
Information Report, has expounded that over the course of the
past five years, a business association has been cultivated
between the informant and Mr. Vikram Bohra. This professional
affiliation has not only led to a mutual familiarity between the
informant and Mr. Bohra but has also established a connection
between the informant and the current applicant.
3. The complainant, in elaboration within the First Information
Report, has asserted that in the year 2022, the present applicant
visited the informant office and communicated the cessation of
employment from the office of Mr. Vikram Bohra. Subsequently,
the applicant disclosed the initiation of a gold retail establishment
situated in the Indralok area of Bhayander. Following this
disclosure, a collaborative business relationship transpired
between the informant and the present applicant, leading to
subsequent business transactions between the Complainant and
present applicant.
4. The informant, in additional testimony within the First
Information Report that present applicant used to visit
 informants office for gold ornament and after choosing the gold
ornament, applicant used to sell ornament from his shop.
5. That Informant further alleged in the FIR that on 1 st April 2023
Present Applicant along with his father and wife visited the
informant place and taken the gold ornaments sum of weight
539.100 gram and that time Informant has given duplicate bill to
the Applicant.
6. The informant has advanced additional allegations and assertions
in the First Information Report, contending that on the 3rd day of
April 2023, the present applicant, accompanied by his father,
revisited the premises of the informant. During this visit, the
applicant purportedly acquired gold ornaments amounting to a
total weight of 151.50 grams (Nickels), 84.360 grams (Bangles),
and a Gold Chain weighing 120.96 grams, aggregating to a
cumulative value of 356.370 grams. It is emphasized that, during
this transaction, the informant issued duplicate bills to the
applicant as documentation of the said acquisition.
7. The complainant further alleges that the present applicant, on
multiple occasions, visited the premises and procured gold
ornaments with a cumulative weight totaling 2542.821 grams
from the informant, ostensibly under the pretext of conducting
business transactions. It is asserted that, concomitant with each
visit, the informant issued duplicate bills to the present applicant
as documentary evidence of the transactions in question.
8. The informant further alleges and asserts that, in accordance
with the instructions/request provided by the present applicant,
the complainant diligently prepared the specified old items along
with a Goods and Services Tax (GST) bill. Subsequently, the
 complainant directed his staff, Mr Sandeep Singh, to effectuate
the delivery of the aforementioned ornaments to the applicant's
address in Bhayander. Following the directive, Mr. Sandeep Singh
arrived at the applicant's shop only to discover its closure.
Subsequently, Mr. Sandeep Singh proceeded to the residential
abode of the applicant, whereupon he made inquiries about the
applicant and expressed his intent to deliver the consignment.
During this encounter, Mr. Sandeep Singh presented the
ornaments accompanied by the GST invoice and also sought
settlement of the outstanding amount from the applicant. At that
juncture, the applicant provided assurance that the entire
outstanding sum would be settled on the 18th day of April 2023.
In reliance upon this assurance, Mr. Sandeep Singh departed
from the premises.
9. The informant has proffered supplementary accusations and
contentions within the First Information Report, contending that,
subsequent to the assurance tendered by the present applicant,
the informant initiated contact with the applicant concerning the
unsettled dues. However, during this attempt, it was observed
that the mobile phone of the applicant was powered off.
Consequently, harbouring suspicions, the informant proceeded to
contact the spouse of the applicant, only to discover that her
mobile phone was also switched off. Subsequently, in light of the
aforementioned circumstances, the informant communicated with
the applicant's father, Mr. Dilip Ojha, regarding the outstanding
financial obligations. At that juncture, Mr. Dilip Ojha facilitated
the settlement of the outstanding sum amounting to INR 6,
 17,000/- through a Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS)
transaction to the informant.
10. The informant, advancing further contentions, alleges that
subsequent to the aforementioned incident, the informant
dispatched his staff to investigate the whereabouts of the present
applicant. During this inquiry, it was discovered that the
premises of the applicant's shop and residence were found
locked. Subsequently, the informant became cognizant of a
pattern of deceit perpetrated by the present applicant against
multiple individuals, prompting the realization that the applicant
had absconded from the locality. In light of these revelations, the
informant, aggrieved by the fraudulent actions of the present
applicant, initiated the filing of the First Information Report
under sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging
offenses related to cheating and criminal breach of trust,
respectively.
GROUNDS
a. That the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in
the alleged offence.
b. There is no cogent or positive evidence to connect the applicant
with the alleged offences;
c. That the applicant has not committed any offence of whatsoever
nature much less the offence mentioned in the FIR.

d. That Honble Court may consider and appreciate that, after

perusal and scrutiny of the FIR filed by the Investigating
machinery before this Honble Court, its seems that entire
transaction is vague and on the basis of bogus evidence,
furthermore Honble Court may consider that Informant has
 himself stated in the FIR that entire transaction is based on the
Duplicate bill, and duplicate bill has not authenticate proof to
establish transaction between the present applicant and
informant.
e. That Honble Court may further appreciate that bill produced by
the informant having no meaning under the law, if Honble court
peruse the Bill, Present applicant has not endorse his signature,
it seems that informant has prepared the Duplicate bill with
malafide intention to just implicate the present applicant in the
false case.
f. That Honble Court may further appreciate that Informant has
misleaded the investigating machinery as well as this Honble
Court that prior to present FIR, one more FIR has been
registered in the Navghar Police Station related the same
transaction. Hereto the Copy of the FIR Navhghar Police Station
is annexed and marked as “Exhibit-C” for the perusal of the
Honble Court.
g. That Honble Court may further consider that Prior to the
present FIR, Navghar Police Station has lodged FIR against the
Present applicant under section 420,406 of the IPC and during
the course of the Investigation, navghar Police Station has find
that Informant has forcefully taken the gold ornaments from the
present applicant from his residential premises and shop and
same has been captured in the CCTV footage and bases on this
Navghar Police Station has added the IPC Section 392,452 of the
IPC against the present informant and Mr Sandeep Singh.
Hereto the Copy of the say filed by the Navghar police Station in
 ABA application is annexed and Marked as “Exhibit-D”
for the perusal of this Honble Court.
h. That Honble Court may further consider and appreciate that
after perusal of the say filed by the Navghar Police Station, it
evident that Informant has himself committed the offence and
taken the all gold ornament Sum of Weight 2545 gram, and he
has filed this present FIR to just take revenge from the present
applicant, nothing else.
i. That Honble Court further consider that Navghar Police Station
has lodged an FIR on 17th June 2023 and Informant has filed the
written Complaint before L.T Marg Police Station on 25 th June
2023, its appears that after lodging of FIR before Navghar Police
Station informant has smartly lodged the Complaint before LT
Marg police Station to just show that he is cheated in the hand
of present applicant and same has been taken in the order Sheet
by the Honble Session Court, Thane. Hereto the Copy of the ABA
order is annexed and Marked as “Exhibit-E” for the perusal of
this Honble Court.
j. That the Honble Court may consider and appreciate that the
present F.I.R is filed against the applicant just to take revenge
and to harass the applicant.
k. That the Honble Court may consider and appreciate that there is
no direct evidence to show that the applicant has defrauded the
complainant or neither any evidence related to the transaction
for the same. Here by the prosecution failed to establish the
alleged offence against the applicant.
l. That Honble Court may and appreciate that there is no question
of recovery and discover, therefore putting the behind the bar
will be not justifiable.
m. It is respectfully submitted for the appreciation and
consideration of this Honourable Court that the Learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class (JMFC) failed to duly appreciate the
evidence proffered by the Applicant. Furthermore, during the
hearing, the Honourable JMFC Court overlooked the fact that
prima facie, Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code is not
applicable to the present Applicant. Therefore, it is incumbent
upon this Honourable Court to reassess the matter and
recognize the aforementioned discrepancies in the judgment of
the Learned JMFC.

n. The Honourable Court is implored to further recognize that the

alleged offense delineated in the FIR carries a punishment of less
than seven years. In consonance with the landmark judgment of
the Honourable Apex Court in the cases of Arnesh Kumar Vs the
State of Bihar and Satendra Kumar Antil vs CBI, the Honourable
Apex Court has enunciated guidelines stipulating that routine
arrest is not warranted for offenses with a punishment term
below seven years. The Honourable Court is further reminded of
the court's directive emphasizing compliance with Section 41A,
underscoring the necessity to adhere to procedural safeguards.
Upon perusal of the records, it is evident that the investigative
machinery has not adhered to the guidelines set forth by the
Honourable Apex Court. Hence, on this procedural non-
 compliance ground, the Honourable Court is earnestly urged to
consider the applicant's bail application.
o. That even assuming the prosecution case to be true, the charges
applied against the Applicant are prima facie not applicable as to
Applicant.
p. The Applicant submits that, he is a law-abiding citizen. Hereto
the Copy of the Aadhar Card of the applicant is annexed and
Marked as Exhibit-“F” for the perusal of this Hon'ble Court.
q. In case of Sidhram Mhatre Vs. The states of Maharashtra
wherein Honble Apex court held as that if there is some doubt
with regards to the genuineness of the case of the prosecution,
then grant of bail rules.
r. In case of State Of Rajasthan V. Balchand Alias Baliya in
1978. Bail is ruled, jail an exception is a legal principal that was
laid down by the judgment was based upon several rights that
have been guaranteed by the constitution of India. The main
purpose of detention is to ensure easy proceedings by availing
the accused for the trails without any inconvenience. Thus, if it
can be ensured that the accused will be available as and when
required for the trial, then, detaining the person is not
necessary. Therefore, it was held that the provisions of the
Criminal procedure Code, 1973(CrPC) regarding the arrest of an
individual must be interpreted in a sense that unless
indispensable, detention of a person must be avoided.
s. He is the eldest among all his family and earning money for his
family. He is a serviceman by profession. In the light of this
ground, it would be just and necessary to grant bail to the
Applicant.
t. That, applicant, is having minor daughters, and since he is
behind the bar nobody to take care of them. Because of this
case, the applicant may lose his job and lost shelter.
u. The Applicant states and submits that, by keeping him in jail for
a long period he will come in contact with the hardcore
criminals, which will affect the entire life of the Applicant.
v. The Applicant states and submits that, he is ready to attend the
police station as and when required if released on bail.
w. He further undertakes to abide by the condition, if any, imposed
by this Hon’ble Court.
x. The Applicant submits that no other similar application is
pending before any other court of law.
y. The Applicant submits that this Hon’ble Court is empowered to
try, entertain, and dispose of the present Application.
z. The Applicant craves leave to add to, amend, delete or modify all
or any of the aforesaid grounds with the leave of the Court.
IN THE AFORESAID CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPLICANT
HUMBLY PRAY:
(a) That applicant may be released on bail subject to such terms
and conditions as deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court;
(b) That passed any further and other reliefs, as this Hon’ble Court
may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the
case.
Dated this 15th March 2024

Filed by
Adv. Indreshkumar V. Tiwari
(Advocate for the Applicant)
 IN THE COURT OF HONBLE SESSION COURT AT BOMBAY

BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2024

IN
FIR No-727 of 2023

KIRTI KUMAR OJHA )… Applicant

Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA )
(At the instance of L.T Marg Police Station )… Respondent

Index

Sr.No. Particulars Page

Nos.

1 Roznama

2 Bail Application

3 Exhibit A- copy of the F.I.R

4 Exhibit B- copy of the Order
5 Exhibit C- copy of the Aadhar
Card

Advocate for the Applicant

Indreshkumar V.
Tiwari
Advocate for the Applicant
Police Station-LT Marg PS
FIR NO- 0727 OF 2023
Mob-9702431506
Email-itiwari82@gmail.com