ITESH HASMUKHLAL JAINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2026:BHC-AUG:26097
                                                                     921-ABA-516-2026.odt



                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 516 OF 2026

                                   ITESH HASMUKHLAL JAIN
                                           VERSUS
                        THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
                                             …..
          Mr. Ronak Shah a/w Mr. d. R. Jethaliya, Advocate for Applicant
          Mr. A. V. Lawate, APP for Respondents

                                                          CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J
                                                          DATE  : JULY 02, 2026
          P. C. :

          1.          Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with C.R. No.

          285/2025 registered with Police Station Shirpur City, District Dhule for the

          offences punishable under Sections 403, 409, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal

          Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of

          Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act.


          2.          In short, it is the case of the prosecution that in Shirpur

          Merchant Cooperative Bank Ltd, suspicious transactions of loan were found

          during audit. The present Applicant is one of such person who claims to

          have obtained loan of Rs. 50,00,000/- without any security being placed for

          the same. It is alleged that over an amount of Rs. 1 Crore is due from the

          Applicant. The complaint is made on the basis of grievance made by the

          genuine depositors to say that money deposited by them is misused in this

          manner.



                                            Page 1 of 3
                                                            921-ABA-516-2026.odt



3.          Learned Counsel for the Applicant, at the outset, submits that

the Applicant had filed for loan earlier, however, he never received the loan.

It is claimed that by using said documents submitted by him, fresh loan is

shown in his name for which he cannot be held responsible. It is his further

submission that having regard to the said fact, the possibility of misuse of

documents exists. He drew attention of the Court to the fact that one of the

loan account has been settled by payment made by one of the directors and

which according to him, shows that the Applicant has not taken loan but

other accused persons in the name of Applicant have obtained said money.


4.          Learned APP opposed the said contention by pointing out the

fact that in the year 2025 mortgage deed came to be executed in respect of

loan obtained by the Applicant. It is submitted that the Applicant had full

knowledge about the loan transaction and now he cannot be allowed to

deny the same. It is submitted that the document collected during the

course of investigation so also audit report shows that the huge amount of

loan were obtained by persons like Applicant and the genuine depositors of

the bank are duped. It is his contention that having regard to the manner in

which the offense in question has been committed, the custodial

interrogation of the Applicant would be necessary.


5.          It is not the case of the Applicant that there does not exist any

loan in his name. He claims that by misusing the documents submitted by


                                  Page 2 of 3
                                                            921-ABA-516-2026.odt



him at earlier point of time, the said loan has been shown in his name.

There are documents on record to indicate that the amount of Rs.

50,00,000/- was disbursed to the Applicant and from his account it has gone

to the third party's account. Though it is now claimed by the Applicant that

he had no knowledge about the transaction, this contention of the Applicant

gets falsified from the admitted fact that in the year 2025 the Applicant has

executed an agreement mortgaging property of another person towards

security of the said loan. This fact indicates about knowledge of the

Applicant of the said loan transaction. Moreover, there is material on record

to show that the said property is encumbered and as such, mala fide

intention of the Applicant can be gathered from execution of the said

document. Thus, there is prima facie material on record to indicate mala

fide on the part of the Applicant in obtaining loan and not returning the

same. Moreover, the defense sought to be taken by the Applicant gets

falsified in view of the documents on record. This Court finds substance in

the contention of the learned APP that in the facts of the case, custodial

interrogation of the Applicant would be necessary.


6.          In view of the above, Application deserves to be dismissed and

the same is accordingly dismissed.



                                                     (R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Malani



                                  Page 3 of 3