Material on record shows Darekar’s complicity in offence: Court

The court also took note of the fact that the labour society of which Darekar claimed to be a member, did not function from its registered address

Mumbai While rejecting the anticipatory bail application of BJP leader Pravin Darekar, the Mumbai sessions court observed that material on record prima facie shows complicity of the accused in the offence and beneficiary of the crime.

In the detailed order, which became available on Saturday, additional sessions judge Rahul Rokade observed that if the pre-arrest bail plea was allowed, it would greatly harm the investigations (Anshuman Poyrekar/HT PHOTO)

The court also took note of the fact that the labour society of which Darekar claimed to be a member, did not function from its registered address.

In the detailed order, which became available on Saturday, additional sessions judge Rahul Rokade observed that if the pre-arrest bail plea was allowed, it would greatly harm the investigations and would impede the prospects of unearthing the conspiracy. “Public interest also would suffer as a consequence,” said the judge.

The 52-year-old BJP leader from Magathane in Borivali East has been booked by the MRA Marg police in Mumbai on March 14 on the basis of a complaint lodged by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Dhananjay Shinde.

On the basis of an order passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Mumbai, Shinde alleged that Darekar was not qualified to become a member of a labour society and still he filed his nomination for the post of director of the Mumbai Central Co-Operative Bank from the labour constituency. He went on to become chairman of the cooperative bank and held the post for 10 years, from 2011 to 2021.

The court noted that the inquiry reports of the co-operative department showed that Pratidnya Labour Society was registered in the year 1994 and three years later, Darekar became its member, but during the inspection by the co-operative department, the record of his membership was not made available, stating that it was “spoilt due to heavy rains”.

“The inspections further revealed that the said society did not have a work distribution register. An amount of ₹25,750 was paid in cash to Darekar for labour work by showing attendance for 30 days in April 2017, 20 days in November 2017 and 10 days in December 2017. The applicant has signed the attendance register as a supervisor. There is prima facie material to show the complicity of the applicant in the offence. He is a direct beneficiary of the alleged offence,” the court observed.

“The allegation of forgery is based on the record prepared in respect of membership of the applicant in Pratidnya Labour Society. The said society was not functioning on the given address. In the peculiar facts of the case, in my considered view, the applicant has not made out a prima facie case for grant of pre-arrest bail,” the court added.