Keywords: Cheating, Criminal Breach Of Trust , Anticipatory Bail, Prevention Of Money Laundering
At the Pimpri Police Station, a case of infidelity, felonious breach of trust, and phony was registered against Amar Mulchandani and others who were at the helm of affairs of the bank.
This case pertain to Amar Mulchandani, who’s a former external corporator with the Congress party who joined the BJP in 2016. He was arrested in July this time in a plutocrat laundering case involving a collaborative bank. Mulchandani, formerly a corporator of the Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation( PCMC) with the Congress Party, had joined the BJP in 2016. On July 1 of this time, he was arrested under the Prevention of plutocrat Laundering Act, 2002.
He has been in guardianship related to a case involving the Seva Vikas Cooperative Bank. According to the report the Bank passed the loss of ‚ ¹ 429 crore in 124non-performing means loan accounts.
While he was in the guardianship he sought an anticipant bail for the case registered by a plaintiff in Pimpri. The plaintiff raised an expostulation to the operation forpre-arrest bail, arguing that a person formerly in guardianship isn’t entitled to seekpre-arrest bail for other crimes registered against them. Justice NJ Jamadar considered a solicitation filed by Mulchandani regarding a case.
A case of infidelity, felonious breach of trust, and phony was registered against Mulchandani so the advocate Ponda who was representing the case of Mulchandani argued that an arrest in one case shouldn’t help a person from seeking the statutory remedy handed under Section 438 of the law. When indicted face the trouble of unjustified apprehensions in multiple cases.
Ponda stated that taking a different view would irreparably jeopardise cherished particular liberty. Advocate Naresh Shamnani, who was representing the plaintiff stated that primary reason for grantingpre-arrest bail is to cover individualities who sweat unjustified arrest from injury and demotion. So the person who’s formerly in guardianship can not claim similar implicit detriment and demotion, they aren’t entitled to seek anticipant bail.
Mulchandani has been granted interim protection from arrest in the Pimpri case, and the high court of Bombay will continue to hear his anticipant bail plea on November 9.
Written By: Shalmali Ugare, College: DES Navalmal Firodia Law college, PUNE, Sem: 3rd Sem SY LLB Intern under legal vidhiya
Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.
0 Comments